OCS One Complete Solution Ltd -v- Dublin Airport Authority plc and another [2014] IESC 51 (31 July 2014)

OCS One Complete Solution Ltd -v- Dublin Airport Authority plc and another [2014] IESC 51 (31 July 2014)

The court held that the automatic suspension of contract conclusion under Article 8(2) of the Regulations applies upon the bringing of a substantive application for review under Article 8(1)(b), even if the application is made after the standstill period, and that no specific motion is required to trigger the suspension. The court further held that it has no jurisdiction to permit the contracting entity to conclude the contract prior to determination of the review application.

Citation
[2014] IESC 51
Parties
Applicant/respondent: OCS One Complete Solutions Limited; Respondent/appellant: Dublin Airport Authority plc; Notice Party: Maybin Support Services (Ireland) Limited t/a Momentum Support
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
31 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Ruling on Principal Conclusions Pending Full Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; notice to vary allowed
Legal Topics
Contract Award Review Procedures, Automatic Suspension of Contract Conclusion, Jurisdiction of Courts Under Procurement Regulations
Public Procurement Administrative Law European Union Law Contract Award Review Procedures Automatic Suspension of Contract Conclusion Jurisdiction of Courts Under Procurement Regulations

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OCS One Complete Solutions Limited

Applicant/respondent

Dublin Airport Authority plc

Respondent/appellant

Maybin Support Services (Ireland) Limited t/a Momentum Support

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Ruling on Principal Conclusions Pending Full Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the automatic suspension of contract conclusion applies when a review application is brought after the standstill period under the European Communities (Award of Contracts by Utility Undertakings) (Review Procedures) Regulations, 2010
  2. 2 Whether a specific motion is required to trigger the suspension
  3. 3 Whether the court has jurisdiction to permit contract conclusion prior to review determination

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the automatic suspension of contract conclusion under Article 8(2) of the Regulations applies upon the bringing of a substantive application for review under Article 8(1)(b), even if the application is made after the standstill period, and that no specific motion is required to trigger the suspension. The court further held that it has no jurisdiction to permit the contracting entity to conclude the contract prior to determination of the review application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; notice to vary allowed

Orders

  • Appeal will be dismissed upon delivery of full judgment
  • Notice to vary allowed