Brookhouse Group Limited v Lancashire County Council

Brookhouse Group Limited v Lancashire County Council

Regulation 93(5) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 does not apply where no competitive tendering process has been conducted and the Claimant is neither a candidate nor a tenderer. The reasons provided by the Defendant did not constitute 'relevant reasons' under Regulation 55(2). Therefore, the 30-day...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Brookhouse Group Limited; Defendant: Lancashire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (public Procurement) / Application for Strike Out and Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claimant's application to strike out paragraphs 21-25 of the Defence is allowed; Defendant's application for strike out and summary judgment is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Limitation Periods, Declaration of Ineffectiveness, Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Interpretation of Public Contracts Regulations 2015
Public Procurement Contract Law Civil Procedure Limitation Periods Declaration of Ineffectiveness Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Interpretation of Public Contracts Regulations 2015

Source-derived case record

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brookhouse Group Limited

Claimant

Lancashire County Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (public Procurement) / Application for Strike Out and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the limitation defence under Regulation 93(5) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 applies where no competitive tendering process was conducted
  2. 2 Whether the reasons provided by the Defendant to the Claimant constituted 'relevant reasons' under Regulation 55(2) of the PCRs
  3. 3 Whether paragraphs 21-25 of the Defence disclose reasonable grounds for defending the claim

Ratio Decidendi

Regulation 93(5) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 does not apply where no competitive tendering process has been conducted and the Claimant is neither a candidate nor a tenderer. The reasons provided by the Defendant did not constitute 'relevant reasons' under Regulation 55(2). Therefore, the 30-day limitation period was not triggered, and the six-month limitation period under Regulation 93(2)(b) applies. The Defendant's limitation defence discloses no reasonable grounds and is struck out.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application to strike out paragraphs 21-25 of the Defence is allowed; Defendant's application for strike out and summary judgment is dismissed.

Orders

  • Paragraphs 21-25 of the Defence are struck out.
  • Defendant's application for strike out and summary judgment is dismissed.