Suspension on Award of Fire Brigade Safety Equipment Contract Maintained

If you feel that you have been treated unfairly in a public contract tendering exercise, you are anything but powerless and should take legal advice straight away. A High Court case on point concerned the award of a contract for the supply of protective breathing equipment to a municipal fire…

Aug 11, 2021

Logan weaver wverfzupxug unsplash 683x1024

Recent years have brought significant improvements in safety apparatus used by firefighters and, against the background of the Grenfell Tower disaster, the brigade was anxious to update its officers’ equipment. A company that had provided respiratory apparatus to the brigade for 10 years was one of those who tendered for a fresh 10-year contract. The contract was, however, awarded to a trade rival after it scored higher than the company, both in terms of quality and price.

The company launched proceedings against the brigade under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, arguing that the tendering process was seriously flawed. It asserted, amongst other things, that the rival’s tender was abnormally low and that there were manifest errors in scoring bids. The allegations were disputed by the brigade but, by operation of Regulation 95(1) of the Regulations, award of the contract was automatically suspended pending resolution of the dispute.

In rejecting the brigade’s application to lift the suspension, the Court found that the company had raised serious issues to be tried. If the suspension were lifted in error, the company would not be adequately compensated by an award of damages. The same could, however, also be said of the brigade if the suspension were maintained in error, thus delaying the award of an important contract.

The Court acknowledged that the public interest in the timely introduction of new protective equipment was a very strong factor in favour of lifting the suspension. However, the Court was in a position to accommodate an expedited trial of the dispute within a matter of weeks. Such a brief delay would not have any major impact on the progress of the equipment improvements. The balance thus came down in favour of maintaining the suspension until the outcome of the trial.

Highway Authority Not Responsible for Catastrophic M25 Lorry Crash

Those involved in catastrophic road accidents frequently point the finger of blame at potholes or other defects in the road surface. As one case showed, however, it can be an uphill task to pin responsibility for such accidents on highway authorities. The case concerned an accident which befell an articulated lorry whilst works were in progress to convert a stretch of the M25 into a smart motorway. The lorry was using the hard shoulder when its wheels strayed onto the verge and over a filter…

Small Employer Pays Heavily for Ignorance of the Acas Code

Ignorance of the Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures is a positive invitation to Employment Tribunal (ET) proceedings. A small employer found that out to its cost after a cleaner was sacked by text message. When the woman launched proceedings, the owner of the six-employee business for which she worked contended that she had been dismissed for gross misconduct. He confirmed, however, that he had not followed the Acas Code and that, having never dismissed an employee…

Victim of Anti-English Workplace Abuse Receives Substantial Damages

A certain amount of workplace banter may be tolerated, but every sensible employer is aware that it may be the thin end of a wedge leading to unlawful discrimination. In a case on point, an English lorry driver who suffered wounding verbal abuse after taking a job north of the border was awarded substantial compensation. The man’s line manager did not like him and referred to him in demeaning and foul-mouthed terms by reference to his nationality. During a football tournament, he was informed…