The Court of Appeal held that the tender language did not create a mandatory exclusion clause and that DWP should have sought clarification of obvious pricing errors.
The tender documentation, when read as a whole, was sufficiently clear and transparent to a reasonably well-informed and diligent tenderer that exceeding the Framework Maximum Prices could result in exclusion. The Defendants exercised their discretion to exclude Optima's non-compliant bid in a manner consistent with the principles of transparency, equal treatment, and proportionality. The error in Optima's bid was not obvious or easily correctable, and seeking clarification or permitting amendment would have risked unequal treatment. The Defendants' decision was neither irrational, arbitrary,…