Robert Heath Heating Ltd v Orbit Group Ltd [2024] EWHC 3039 (TCC) (27 November 2024)

Robert Heath Heating Ltd v Orbit Group Ltd [2024] EWHC 3039 (TCC) (27 November 2024)

The court held that the Claimant had established a serious issue to be tried in respect of both the conflict of interest and scoring challenges. However, the court found that damages would be an adequate remedy for the Claimant if it succeeded at trial, given the nature of the claim (loss of opportunity, not lost profits) and the ability to assess damages for loss of chance. The balance of convenience favoured lifting the automatic suspension, as the disadvantages to the Defendant and public interest in timely contract performance outweighed the speculative disadvantages to the Claimant.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 3039 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Robert Heath Heating Limited; Defendant: Orbit Group Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Procurement Challenge Under Public Contracts Regulations 2015 / Interlocutory Applications: Defendant's Application to Lift Automatic Suspension and Claimant's Application for Early Specific Disclosure
Outcome
Defendant's application to lift the automatic suspension granted; Claimant's application for early specific disclosure refused.
Legal Topics
Automatic Suspension Under PCR 2015, Conflicts of Interest in Procurement, Tender Evaluation and Scoring, Adequacy of Damages, Interim Relief in Procurement Disputes
Public Procurement Contract Law Automatic Suspension Under PCR 2015 Conflicts of Interest in Procurement Tender Evaluation and Scoring Adequacy of Damages Interim Relief in Procurement Disputes

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Heath Heating Limited

Claimant

Orbit Group Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Procurement Challenge Under Public Contracts Regulations 2015 / Interlocutory Applications: Defendant's Application to Lift Automatic Suspension and Claimant's Application for Early Specific Disclosure

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a serious issue to be tried regarding alleged conflict of interest and scoring in procurement process
  2. 2 Whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the claimant if the suspension were lifted
  3. 3 Where the balance of convenience lies in relation to lifting the automatic suspension

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Claimant had established a serious issue to be tried in respect of both the conflict of interest and scoring challenges. However, the court found that damages would be an adequate remedy for the Claimant if it succeeded at trial, given the nature of the claim (loss of opportunity, not lost profits) and the ability to assess damages for loss of chance. The balance of convenience favoured lifting the automatic suspension, as the disadvantages to the Defendant and public interest in timely contract performance outweighed the speculative disadvantages to the Claimant.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to lift the automatic suspension granted; Claimant's application for early specific disclosure refused.

Orders

  • The automatic suspension under Regulation 95 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 is lifted with immediate effect, permitting the Defendant to enter into the contracts with Aaron Services Limited.
  • The Claimant's application for early specific disclosure is refused.