ARTICLE
30 August 2012

Obligation To Verify Tender Content

MH
Mason Hayes & Curran

Contributor

Mason Hayes & Curran logo
As legal and regulatory responsibilities become more complex, progressive organisations need measured advice to help realise their ambitions. The expertise Mason Hayes & Curran brings is rooted in unrivalled knowledge of various industries, so the firm’s advice is always set in its commercial context. The firm solves the issues companies face today and anticipates the challenges they will face tomorrow. By tailoring its advice to its clients’ business and strategic objectives and giving them clear recommendations, Mason Hayes & Curran helps its clients to make good, informed decisions and to anticipate and successfully navigate even the most complex matters.
The Legal Services Commission ("LSC") issued a tender for contracts in a number of areas of law, including public law and mental health.
Ireland Corporate/Commercial Law

The Legal Services Commission ("LSC") issued a tender for contracts in a number of areas of law, including public law and mental health. It was claimed that the LSC acted unlawfully by failing to take adequate steps to verify that those who had been awarded contracts satisfied all the criteria laid down in the tender for public law and mental health.

The English High Court applying EVN v Austria (Case C-448/01), upheld the claim stating that if the public authority is (a) unable to verify the criteria or (b) omits to do so, an infringement of the principle of equality and a breach of procurement law will have occurred.

This is a significant decision as it suggests that public bodies may, in certain cases, have to take positive steps to verify aspects of tenders submitted and also makes clear that the matter being evaluated must be capable of being verified.  It may be of particular interest in the context of the new regime provided for under Circular 10/10 where candidates declare, in the first instance, that they meet the pre-qualification requirements instead of providing substantive responses for evaluation.  It would be prudent in light of this case to subsequently obtain evidence from the successful candidates which substantiates any declaration and, if this is not provided, to reject the tenderer accordingly.  It may also have wider application in other instances. 

Public Interest Lawyers v Legal Services Commission [2010] EWHC 3277

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More