Advanced Totes Limited -v- Bord na gCon [2006] IESC 17 (23 March 2006)

Advanced Totes Limited -v- Bord na gCon [2006] IESC 17 (23 March 2006)

The contracting authority failed to comply with Article 36 of the Services Directive by not stating the internal/external IT hub criterion in the award criteria and not ranking criteria in descending order of importance, resulting in a lack of transparency required by EU law.

Citation
[2006] IESC 17
Parties
Appellant/applicant: Advanced Totes Limited; Respondent: Bord na gCon; Notice Party: Autotote Worldwide Services Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
23 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review/appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside
Legal Topics
Award Criteria Transparency, Equal Treatment, Contracting Authority Obligations, Remedies for Breach of Procurement Rules
Public Procurement Administrative Law European Union Law Award Criteria Transparency Equal Treatment Contracting Authority Obligations Remedies for Breach of Procurement Rules

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Advanced Totes Limited

Appellant/applicant

Bord na gCon

Respondent

Autotote Worldwide Services Limited

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review/appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the award criteria complied with EU and Irish public procurement law
  2. 2 Whether the contracting authority failed to state criteria in descending order of importance
  3. 3 Whether the procedure lacked transparency and equal treatment

Ratio Decidendi

The contracting authority failed to comply with Article 36 of the Services Directive by not stating the internal/external IT hub criterion in the award criteria and not ranking criteria in descending order of importance, resulting in a lack of transparency required by EU law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside

Orders

  • High Court order refusing relief is set aside
  • Applicant's appeal is allowed