Midlands Co-Operative Society Ltd, R (on the application of) v Tesco Stores Ltd

Midlands Co-Operative Society Ltd, R (on the application of) v Tesco Stores Ltd

The Council's arrangement with Tesco did not impose a legally enforceable obligation to carry out works, so it was not a public works contract under the procurement regulations; the Council obtained best consideration for the land sale; the tender process and CPO authorisation were not legally unfair and did not breach legitimate expectation.

Parties
Claimant: Midlands Co-operative Society Limited; Defendant: Birmingham City Council; Interested Party: Tesco Stores Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Permission to proceed granted; substantive application for judicial review refused on all grounds.
Legal Topics
Public Contracts Directive, Local Government Act 1972 Section 123(2), Compulsory Purchase Orders, Best Consideration, Legitimate Expectation
Administrative Law Local Government Law Public Procurement Law Public Contracts Directive Local Government Act 1972 Section 123(2) Compulsory Purchase Orders Best Consideration Legitimate Expectation

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Midlands Co-operative Society Limited

Claimant

Birmingham City Council

Defendant

Tesco Stores Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council's disposal of land to Tesco breached the Public Contracts Directive and Public Contracts Regulations 2006
  2. 2 Whether the Council breached its duty under section 123(2) of the Local Government Act 1972 to obtain best consideration
  3. 3 Whether the tender process and CPO authorisation were legally unfair or breached legitimate expectation

Ratio Decidendi

The Council's arrangement with Tesco did not impose a legally enforceable obligation to carry out works, so it was not a public works contract under the procurement regulations; the Council obtained best consideration for the land sale; the tender process and CPO authorisation were not legally unfair and did not breach legitimate expectation.

Court Disposition

Permission to proceed granted; substantive application for judicial review refused on all grounds.