SHETLAND LINE (1984) Ltd v. THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2014] ScotCS CSOH_12 (28 January 2014)

SHETLAND LINE (1984) Ltd v. THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2014] ScotCS CSOH_12 (28 January 2014)

In the circumstances, the pursuer satisfied the notification requirement under regulation 47(6)(a)(ii) by providing timely notice of its intention to raise proceedings, given the compressed timeline caused by the defenders' actions and the need for an effective remedy. The defenders' plea that the action should be dismissed for lack of notice was therefore repelled.

Citation
[2014] ScotCS CSOH_12
Parties
Pursuer: Shetland Line (1984) Limited; Defenders: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Procurement Challenge / Interlocutory Decision on Notification Requirement
Outcome
Defenders' first plea-in-law repelled; case to proceed to further hearing.
Legal Topics
Notification Requirement Under Procurement Regulations, Standstill Period, Effective Remedies in Procurement Challenges
Public Procurement Administrative Law European Union Law Notification Requirement Under Procurement Regulations Standstill Period Effective Remedies in Procurement Challenges

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shetland Line (1984) Limited

Pursuer

The Scottish Ministers

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Procurement Challenge / Interlocutory Decision on Notification Requirement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer complied with the notification requirement under regulation 47(6)(a)(ii) of the Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2006 prior to raising proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

In the circumstances, the pursuer satisfied the notification requirement under regulation 47(6)(a)(ii) by providing timely notice of its intention to raise proceedings, given the compressed timeline caused by the defenders' actions and the need for an effective remedy. The defenders' plea that the action should be dismissed for lack of notice was therefore repelled.

Court Disposition

Defenders' first plea-in-law repelled; case to proceed to further hearing.

Orders

  • Repel defenders' first plea-in-law.
  • Fix a by order hearing to discuss further procedure.