In the first of a series, this article examines the impact of the Derby case on how local authorities should apply and charities can claim business rate relief.
Procuring organisations who have to make substantial changes to a contract during an OJEU tender process can breathe a sigh of relief. The threat of that contract being set aside for “ineffectiveness” because the changed contract has not been “advertised in OJEU” has now been removed.
The scenario is this - a contract is advertised in OJEU and substantial changes are then made to that contract during the tender process. Does this mean that the original OJEU notice no longer applies because the contract being procured is no longer the one that was advertised?
“No,” said the High Court in a recent case*. The issue here was whether a substantial change to the contract from the one that was tendered meant that the changed contract had not been advertised. This would have made it an illegal direct award and liable to be set aside for “ineffectiveness” throughout the six-months after it is entered into.
The court said that to prevent a challenge for ineffectiveness the OJEU notice just had to be “capable of being related to the procedure and contract awarded”. The fact that there had been a substantial change did not mean that the revised contract had not been let “without prior publication of an OJEU notice”.
This is welcome news. But there is a sting in the tail. The substantial change could still result in a claim for damages, for example from a contractor who has been denied the opportunity to tender for the revised contract because it has not been advertised.
If there is time to start a new procurement, then the best option is usually to do so. Where there is no time to do this, the case provides welcome reassurance that the changed contract is not at risk of set-aside because it has not been “advertised in OJEU”.
*AEW Europe LLP v Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council  EWHC 2050
For more information
Please contact Andrew Millross.
“Monitoring the Mental Health Act in 2018/19” published by the CQC, has found that although improvements have been made, healthcare services need to do more to comply with their human rights duties.
The IPPR North report says that this Parliament must be the “Devolution Parliament” to truly “level up” the country.
On 20 January 2020, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) issued Advice for Building Owners of Multi-storey, Multi-occupied Residential Buildings.
The Society for Computers and Law (SCL) has introduced an Adjudication Scheme for IT Projects and Services.
The board of a housing services company was reportedly dismissed in December 2019 following the discovery of a variety of safety and hygiene issues in the properties they manage.
The Heat Network (Metering and Billing) Regulations 2014 (the Regulations) place certain responsibilities on anyone supplying and charging for heating, cooling or hot water (the heat supplier).
In our latest Company Secretary Update, we focus on the Queen’s Speech over Christmas and the recommendations and commitments in relation to housing.
So after two days of legal argument, the Supreme Court have now retired to reach their decision in the joined cases of Tomlinson-Blake v the Royal Mencap Society and Shannon v Rampersad.
Anthony Collins Solicitors has revealed details of its annual social impact, including advising on funding deals for building 19,603 new homes and setting up 90 new charities.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.