Mears Ltd v Leeds City Council (No 2) [2011] EWHC 1031 (TCC) (19 April 2011)

Mears Ltd v Leeds City Council (No 2) [2011] EWHC 1031 (TCC) (19 April 2011)

Mears' claims regarding non-disclosure of model answers and scoring guidance were brought in time, as knowledge of the alleged infringement only arose upon disclosure. Leeds City Council was required to disclose any criteria, sub-criteria, or weightings used in evaluation that were not reasonably foreseeable to a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 1031 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Mears Limited; Defendant: Leeds City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Procurement Challenge / Judgment on Preliminary Issues of Liability
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Transparency in Procurement, Disclosure of Evaluation Criteria, Weighting of Tender Criteria, Time Limits for Procurement Challenges
Public Procurement Administrative Law Transparency in Procurement Disclosure of Evaluation Criteria Weighting of Tender Criteria Time Limits for Procurement Challenges

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mears Limited

Claimant

Leeds City Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Procurement Challenge / Judgment on Preliminary Issues of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Leeds City Council breached Regulations 4(3) and 30(3)-(5) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 by failing to disclose model answers and scoring guidance to tenderers
  2. 2 Whether claims based on non-disclosure of model answers were brought within the time limits under Regulation 47(7)(b)
  3. 3 Whether Mears suffered loss or risk of loss as a result of the alleged breaches

Ratio Decidendi

Mears' claims regarding non-disclosure of model answers and scoring guidance were brought in time, as knowledge of the alleged infringement only arose upon disclosure. Leeds City Council was required to disclose any criteria, sub-criteria, or weightings used in evaluation that were not reasonably foreseeable to a diligent tenderer. The court found that the model answers and scoring guidance did not introduce undisclosed criteria or weightings requiring disclosure under the Regulations. Even if there had been a breach, Mears would not have succeeded in the procurement based on the scoring evidence.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • Permission granted to amend Particulars of Claim to include claims based on model answers as of 19 January 2011
  • All substantive claims dismissed; no order requiring re-run of procurement or other relief