Siemens Mobility Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2768 (TCC) (06 November 2023)

Siemens Mobility Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2768 (TCC) (06 November 2023)

The court found that HS2's evaluation process, exercise of discretion regarding the Shortfall Tender, consent to change of control, Stage 5 evaluation, abnormally low tender review, verification and pre-contract checks, and handling of alleged conflicts of interest were lawful and within the margin of discretion afforded to contracting authorities. No manifest errors or breaches of procurement law were established. The claims of unlawful contract modification and conflict of interest were not substantiated. Accordingly, Siemens' claims failed on all substantive grounds.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 2768 (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
06 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Procurement Challenge and Judicial Review / First Instance Judgment on Liability and Causation
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Procurement Procedures, Tender Evaluation, Conflict of Interest, Change of Control, Abnormally Low Tenders, Contract Modifications, Judicial Review
Public Procurement Administrative Law Contract Law Procurement Procedures Tender Evaluation Conflict of Interest Change of Control Abnormally Low Tenders +2 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
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

Consolidated Procurement Challenge and Judicial Review / First Instance Judgment on Liability and Causation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HS2's evaluation of tenders was manifestly erroneous or unlawful
  2. 2 Whether HS2 lawfully exercised discretion to allow a Shortfall Tender to proceed
  3. 3 Whether HS2 lawfully consented to change of control after Alstom's acquisition of Bombardier

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that HS2's evaluation process, exercise of discretion regarding the Shortfall Tender, consent to change of control, Stage 5 evaluation, abnormally low tender review, verification and pre-contract checks, and handling of alleged conflicts of interest were lawful and within the margin of discretion afforded to contracting authorities. No manifest errors or breaches of procurement law were established. The claims of unlawful contract modification and conflict of interest were not substantiated. Accordingly, Siemens' claims failed on all substantive grounds.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • All claims by Siemens dismissed
  • No declaratory relief or damages awarded