The first UK judgment on the remedy of ineffectiveness between Alstom and Eurostar has shown up flaws in the process for deciding the fate of public procurement contracts believes Nick Maltby, partner, Bircham Dyson Bell LLP.

"I think the case raises concerns around giving plaintiffs effective remedies where the terms of the contract change significantly once a preferred bidder has been appointed," explains Nick Maltby.

"The Alstom case was a straight forward enough case to decide in terms of 'ineffectiveness' and the facts were quite unusual, but it would have been open to the court to take a narrower view of whether Eurostar had satisfied the requirements to avoid the contract being ineffective, given that there had been so many changes to the original brief that one might argue made it a fundamentally different contract from the one at the outset.

"In this case, I believe there were good grounds for Alstom to argue that it was an entirely new contract and therefore should have been treated as such - with a brand new bidding process."

The High Court rejected claims from Alstom that the procurement process was flawed, and ruled that rival Siemens should keep the £527 million contract on the basis that Alstom had exceeded the 30 day time limit for bringing the claim, which applies where the utility has provided a "summary" of the reasons to the bidder. However, it would have been possible on the facts for the court to find that no summary for the purposes of the regulations had been provided.

"What this case and the Sita case earlier this year also highlight is that bidders who believe that there have been changes to a contract following the appointment of a preferred bidder need to bring proceedings very quickly and not to wait until they are certain that changes have occurred. The new time limit of 30 days from date of knowledge under the Miscellaneous Amendments regulations, which came into effect on 1 October 2011, certainly does not improve the position of plaintiffs."

"Should the courts be interpreting ineffectiveness where there are changes in this sort of way, so even the most modest form of notice gets you out of the problem? I'm not so sure," concludes Nick Maltby.

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.