Legal News

Court examines sufficient ‘reasons’ and ‘reasoning’ in public procurement consensus scoring (Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust and another v Lancashire County Council)

Court examines sufficient ‘reasons’ and ‘reasoning’ in public procurement consensus scoring (Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust and another v Lancashire County Council)
Published on: 04 July 2018
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Court examines sufficient ‘reasons’ and ‘reasoning’ in public procurement consensus scoring (Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust and another v Lancashire County Council)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Public Law analysis: This public procurement challenge concerned a contract for public health nursing services tendered under the light touch regime (LTR). The challenge was brought by the incumbent providers of the services (two NHS Trusts), whose bid had been unsuccessful in the re-tender for those services. The court held that the ‘pervasive inadequacy’ of an evaluation panel's approach to consensus scoring, prevented the court from determining whether manifest error had, or may have, made a difference to the final scores in a public health services procurement. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents