TES Group Ltd v Northern Ireland Water Ltd

for the Plaintiff David Dunlop QC with Alistair Fletcher (instructed by Tughans Solicitors)

[3]������� Lot 1 was also the subject of a challenge by an unsuccessful tenderer.� However, that challenge was abandoned and the defendant has been able to award contracts to the successful tenderers in respect of Lot 1 although it is claimed by the defendant, without contradiction, that its options for work under Lot 1 have been restricted by the automatic suspension imposed in respect of Lots 2 and 3.� This judgment concentrates on the application by the defendant to remove the Order which prevents it from entering into contracts with the successful tenderers in respect of Lot 2.�

[7]������� There has been a chronic underfunding over the years in Water Services in Northern Ireland.� They are at breaking point and I have covered the consequences �in some detail in paragraphs [7] to [14] of the Lagan judgment and I do not propose to repeat them save to say that further substantial capital investment is required to make the Water Services fit for public purpose.

(a)������� The suspension of Lot 2 has virtually no adverse consequences for Water Services in Northern Ireland;

(b)������ There are other contractual routes allowing Lot 2 work to be carried out in the interim;