Easycoach v Ltd Department for Regional Development

[1] This litigation arises out of a contract procurement exercise undertaken by the Department for Regional Development (" the Department ") culminating in the rejection of the Plaintiff's tender and the enunciation of a decision that the contracts being procured, which were for the provision of certain personal transport services, would be awarded to two commercial competitors (Quinns' Coach Hire Limited � hereinafter "Quinns" - and Out and About Enterprises Limited � hereinafter "Out and About"). This was what is conventionally described as a public procurement exercise.

The evidence establishes that stages (a) and (b) merged to form a single, combined stage.

[4] The decisions under challenge were communicated to the Plaintiff by letter dated 11 th April 2011 which stated, inter alia :

This letter incorporated a table of scores which showed that the Plaintiff had been ranked third in respect of all four geographical contract areas. In each instance, the winning bidder's score was substantially higher than that allocated to the Plaintiff. The evidence includes four separate "Debrief" documents. Each of these details the scores allocated to the Plaintiff in respect of every contract award criterion and sub criterion, with corresponding comments. The latter have the appearance of the composite evaluation panel notes.

[7] During the period which then intervened, the Department purported to conduct this exercise. The evidence of what then transpired was initially very limited. In written form it consisted of the following: