HT-2025-000079 - [2025] EWHC 2634 (TCC)

On 24^th October 2024 the Defendant commenced a procurement exercise with a view to awarding a contract for the provision of global medical support for Ministry of Defence personnel serving overseas (“the Contract”). The Claimant has provided those services since 2012. It has done so latterly pursuant to a contract which was to come to an end on 30^th April 2025. The Claimant and Healix International Group Ltd (“Healix”) were the only compliant tenderers in the procurement exercise and on 7^th March 2025 the Defendant announced its intention to award the contract to Healix. The procurement exercise was governed by the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (“the Regulations”). On 17^th March 2025 the Claimant commenced proceedings alleging breaches of the Regulations. Pursuant to regulation 95 those proceedings triggered the automatic suspension of the Defendant’s power to award the contract.

The Defendant now applies under regulation 96 for that automatic suspension to be lifted. The Claimant resists the lifting of the suspension and contends that the hearing of the claim should be expedited.

The parties are agreed on the substance of the applicable legal principles although there are some differences of emphasis. Although the Defendant contends that the claim is ill-founded it accepts that the Claimant has shown a serious issue to be tried. There were two principal areas of dispute: first, whether damages would be an adequate remedy for the Claimant if the suspension were to be lifted but with the claim ultimately succeeding; second, whether the balance of convenience falls in favour of lifting the suspension (as the Defendant contends) or of maintaining the suspension (the Claimant’s contention).