• Lack of transparency in public procurement processes is potentially unlawful in itself, but can often lead to problems later down the line.

    For contracting authorities, it is important to know how much information to give. For bidders, it is important to know when to seek clarification, and in particular, often risky to adopt a "wait and see" approach.

    The clarifications process which is incorporated into most public procurements is an excellent tool. It enables bidders to address any problems in a non-confrontational manner and avoid prejudice to their bid at evaluation stage.

    Equally, contracting authorities may have to contend with unclear, and potentially non-compliant tender responses from bidders. The decision whether to exclude bidders on that basis, or to ask for clarification, can be fraught with danger and risk of challenge.

    Whether you are a contracting authority or a bidder, our team of experts can advise you how to successfully manage the clarifications process.

  • Whether you are a contracting authority considering its transparency obligations, or a bidder considering whether or not to seek clarification, we can assist you with:

    • reviewing tender documents and evaluation criteria in order to advise on any issues that might amount to a breach of transparency¬†
    • drafting clarifications to contracting authorities
    • advising on the ability to clarify unclear or ambiguous tenders in light of EU and UK case law
    • advising on transparency and debriefing obligations at standstill stage - from both a bidder seeking information and authority perspective.
  • Caveated bid

    We advised an NHS Trust on its ability to reject a tender that included a caveat as to the price submitted. This included weighing up the risk of challenge to a decision to revert to the bidder to obtain clarification, versus a risk of challenge to a decision to exclude the bidder outright. 

    Tender advice

    We advised a bidder on requirements set down in tender documents regarding the ability to act as both prime contractor and sub-contractor, which remained unclarified following the clarifications process. We assisted the bidder with drafting a letter during the tender process. This presented concerns regarding the lack of transparency. The local authority clarified the position and removed the constraint. 

    Advice on lack of transparency

    We advised a bidder on lack of transparency at ITT stage relating to journey data. If left unclarified, it would have resulted in bidders submitting prices on different assumptions, making a "like for like" comparison impossible.

Legal Insights

Bevan Brittan appointed to housing consortium legal framework

23/06/2020

Central Housing Investment Consortium (CHIC)

View all News

Healthcare Estates Breakfast Briefing: The Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic on the Healthcare Estate

15/07/2020

View all Events

The Business and Planning Bill 2020

03/07/2020

The introduction of short term flexibilities to permission time periods, construction working hours & appeal procedure

View all Articles

Our use of cookies

We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We'd also like to set optional analytics cookies to help us improve it. We won't set optional cookies unless you enable them. Using this tool will set a cookie on your device to remember your preferences. For more detailed information about the cookies we use, see our Cookies page.

Necessary cookies

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. You may disable these by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Analytics cookies

We'd like to set Google Analytics cookies to help us to improve our website by collection and reporting information on how you use it. The cookies collect information in a way that does not directly identify anyone.
For more information on how these cookies work, please see our Cookies page.