Millbrook Healthcare Limited v Devon County Council

Millbrook Healthcare Limited v Devon County Council

Damages are an adequate remedy for Millbrook; the risk of no damages due to the 'sufficiently serious' breach requirement does not justify maintaining the suspension. The balance of convenience strongly favours lifting the suspension due to the public interest in timely service improvements and cost savings. The application for expedition is refused as there is no sufficient urgency and delay would be detrimental to the public interest.

Parties
Claimant: Millbrook Healthcare Limited; Defendant: Devon County Council; Interested Party: Nottingham Rehab Limited (T/A NRS Healthcare)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Procurement Challenge / Interlocutory Application (application to Lift Automatic Suspension and Application for Expedition)
Outcome
Application to lift automatic suspension granted; application for expedition dismissed.
Legal Topics
Automatic Suspension Under Public Contracts Regulations 2015, Adequacy of Damages, Francovich Damages, Balance of Convenience, Expedition of Trial, Remedies in Procurement Challenges
Public Procurement Contract Law Administrative Law Automatic Suspension Under Public Contracts Regulations 2015 Adequacy of Damages Francovich Damages Balance of Convenience Expedition of Trial +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Millbrook Healthcare Limited

Claimant

Devon County Council

Defendant

Nottingham Rehab Limited (T/A NRS Healthcare)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Procurement Challenge / Interlocutory Application (application to Lift Automatic Suspension and Application for Expedition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the automatic suspension under Regulation 96(1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 should be lifted
  2. 2 Whether damages are an adequate remedy for the claimant
  3. 3 Whether the risk of no damages due to the 'sufficiently serious' breach requirement justifies maintaining the suspension

Ratio Decidendi

Damages are an adequate remedy for Millbrook; the risk of no damages due to the 'sufficiently serious' breach requirement does not justify maintaining the suspension. The balance of convenience strongly favours lifting the suspension due to the public interest in timely service improvements and cost savings. The application for expedition is refused as there is no sufficient urgency and delay would be detrimental to the public interest.

Court Disposition

Application to lift automatic suspension granted; application for expedition dismissed.

Orders

  • Automatic suspension under Regulation 96(1) PCR 2015 is lifted.
  • Application for expedition is dismissed.