Coulson J, sitting in the Technology and Construction Court, today handed down judgment in Bristol Missing Link Limited v Bristol City Council [2015] EWHC 876 (TCC). The Claimant, a not-for-profit provider of domestic violence and abuse support services, has brought a claim against the Council’s decision to award its contract for those services to another operator, Refuge. The Council applied to lift the automatic suspension imposed by the Regulations, which application was refused by the judge.
Coulson J’s judgment is important in a number of respects. He has held that:
- Contracting authorities should not withhold relevant material in disclosure but then advance it for the first time in an application to lift the automatic suspension, and that in this case the Council had sought a “potentially unfair advantage” by taking that approach.
- It is an “onerous” task to make out a submission that there is no serious issue to be tried, and that where there are points to be made on both sides, argument on the issue is usually unnecessary.
- “Wider considerations of justice”, in the context of the adequacy of damages, are relevant, and that where lifting the automatic suspension would effectively end a claim, there is a “serious risk of injustice”.
- The need for a review of the legality of the Council’s actions was itself a relevant consideration in the balance of convenience.
In this case, the Claimant had established a “self-evident” serious issue to be tried. As a non-profit entity, damages would not be adequate, whereas they would be for the Council. Lifting the suspension would end the claim, which would deprive the Claimant “for all time of a significant legal right”. Six months was not an intolerable delay, the Council could not rely on the benefits of the competitor’s tender when it had not disclosed that information to the Claimant prior to the application, and the new contract did not provide a better service than that currently provided by the Claimant.
Jason Coppel KC and Joseph Barrett appeared for the Claimant, instructed by Emily Heard and Fran Musselwhite of Bevan Brittan LLP.
