Parkingeye Limited v Velindre University NHS Trust & Anor

Parkingeye Limited v Velindre University NHS Trust & Anor

The court refused to lift the automatic suspension because the public interest in ensuring lawful procurement and the statutory purpose of the suspension outweighed the applicants' asserted benefits of the new contract and any private interests. Damages were found to be an adequate remedy for the claimant's commercial interests, and no overriding public interest or exceptional circumstances justified lifting the suspension under section 102(2) of the Procurement Act 2023.

Parties
Claimant / Respondent: Parkingeye Limited; Defendant / Applicant: Velindre University NHS Trust; Defendant / Applicant: Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Procurement Challenge / Application to Lift Automatic Suspension / Interlocutory Application for Orders Under Section 102(2) of the Procurement Act 2023
Outcome
Applications to lift the automatic suspension refused.
Legal Topics
Automatic Suspension, Interim Remedies, Public Interest Balancing, Adequacy of Damages, Statutory Interpretation
Public Procurement Administrative Law Automatic Suspension Interim Remedies Public Interest Balancing Adequacy of Damages Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Parkingeye Limited

Claimant / Respondent

Velindre University NHS Trust

Defendant / Applicant

Cardiff and Vale University Health Board

Defendant / Applicant

Procedural Posture

Procurement Challenge / Application to Lift Automatic Suspension / Interlocutory Application for Orders Under Section 102(2) of the Procurement Act 2023

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct test under section 102(2) of the Procurement Act 2023 for lifting the automatic suspension?
  2. 2 Does the public interest or the interests of suppliers justify lifting the suspension in this case?
  3. 3 Are damages an adequate remedy for the claimant?

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to lift the automatic suspension because the public interest in ensuring lawful procurement and the statutory purpose of the suspension outweighed the applicants' asserted benefits of the new contract and any private interests. Damages were found to be an adequate remedy for the claimant's commercial interests, and no overriding public interest or exceptional circumstances justified lifting the suspension under section 102(2) of the Procurement Act 2023.

Court Disposition

Applications to lift the automatic suspension refused.

Orders

  • Automatic suspension under section 101(1) of the Procurement Act 2023 to remain in place.
  • Respondent to provide an undertaking in damages in the standard form for interim injunctions.