Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Mr Choudhury (instructed by Taylor Vinters) for the Claimant Mr Bowsher QC and Mr Palmer (instructed by Treasury Solicitors) for the Defendant Hearing dates: 13 January 2010 ____________________
i) 20 out of 84 competing suppliers had been successful at the PQQ stage and would be invited to tender for Lot 2;
ii) The range of scores of successful suppliers was 935.71 to 970.00 out of an available maximum of 970.00. The original maximum of 1000 points was reduced to 970 following the withdrawal by the Defendant of one of the questions on the PQQ as a result of a number of challenges brought by bidders;
iii) The Claimant's score was 922 out of 970. It had therefore failed to be shortlisted by a margin of only 13.71 points (1.4%):
iv) The Claimant had scored the maximum available points in respect of all but two of the questions set out in the PQQ. These two were:
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.