Siemens Mobility Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd [2022] EWHC 2451 (TCC) (14 October 2022)

Siemens Mobility Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd [2022] EWHC 2451 (TCC) (14 October 2022)

The claim as pleaded was based on an alleged conflict of interest arising from Messrs Sterry and Williamson's membership of the Bombardier pension scheme, not merely their past employment. The Claimant did not have actual or constructive knowledge of this interest more than 30 days before commencing proceedings, as a RWIND tenderer would not have been required to make further enquiries after the Defendant's October 2021 response. The claim is not time-barred. The Defendant is not estopped from relying on limitation, but the estoppel issue does not arise as the claim is in time. The application for strike out and/or summary judgment is dismissed.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2451 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Siemens Mobility Limited; Defendant: High Speed Two (HS2) Limited; Interested Party: Bombardier Transportation UK Limited; Interested Party: Hitachi Rail Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Procurement Challenge Under the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016 / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment on Limitation Grounds
Outcome
Application for strike out and/or summary judgment dismissed
Legal Topics
Conflicts of Interest, Limitation Periods, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Estoppel, Compliance With Evaluation Procedures
Public Procurement Administrative Law Conflicts of Interest Limitation Periods Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Estoppel Compliance With Evaluation Procedures

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Siemens Mobility Limited

Claimant

High Speed Two (HS2) Limited

Defendant

Bombardier Transportation UK Limited

Interested Party

Hitachi Rail Limited

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Procurement Challenge Under the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016 / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment on Limitation Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim alleging breach of conflict of interest obligations under Regulation 42 of the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016 was brought within the 30-day limitation period under Regulation 107
  2. 2 Whether the claim alleging breach of the Tender Opening Evaluation Procedure (TOEP) was brought in time
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant had actual or constructive knowledge of the facts giving rise to the alleged breaches

Ratio Decidendi

The claim as pleaded was based on an alleged conflict of interest arising from Messrs Sterry and Williamson's membership of the Bombardier pension scheme, not merely their past employment. The Claimant did not have actual or constructive knowledge of this interest more than 30 days before commencing proceedings, as a RWIND tenderer would not have been required to make further enquiries after the Defendant's October 2021 response. The claim is not time-barred. The Defendant is not estopped from relying on limitation, but the estoppel issue does not arise as the claim is in time. The application for strike out and/or summary judgment is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for strike out and/or summary judgment dismissed

Orders

  • The claim is not struck out and may proceed to trial.