The 'external expert' on the evaluation committee turns out to be the same person chairing it — that doesn't count
The Council of State annuls the award of an architectural services contract for a multisports complex renovation because the contracting authority did not compose the evaluation committee as required by the specifications: the 'external expert' was the same person as the project management assistant who chaired the committee.
What happened?
Municipal autonomous agency Nautisport awarded an architectural contract for renovating a multisports site in Enghien. The specifications (art. 2.5.11) required an evaluation committee of four members — including an external expert — chaired by the project management assistant: five persons in total. In practice, the 'external expert' and 'chair' roles were filled by the same person: the representative of AT Osborne, a firm with a pre-existing contractual relationship with the authority. The losing tenderers had flagged this issue before the award. The Council found the tenderers' reading most consistent with the text: if the authority already knew the project management assistant when drafting the specifications, why separately require an 'external expert' unless a different person was intended? By combining the two roles, the authority violated the patere legem principle. After the suspension (arrest 262.831), no one requested continuation. The Council annulled via the accelerated procedure (art. 17, §9).
Why does this matter?
This ruling underscores the importance of correct evaluation committee composition. When specifications require an external expert, that person must be genuinely external — not someone already in a contractual relationship with the authority who is also chairing the committee.
The lesson
For contracting authorities: compose your evaluation committee exactly as the specifications require. If the specifications mention an 'external expert' alongside a chair, those are separate roles. For tenderers: check committee composition against the specifications and flag deviations before the award — this strengthens your position in any subsequent challenge.
Ask yourself
Do your specifications require an 'external expert' on the evaluation committee? Is that person genuinely external, or already contractually linked to the authority? Are the roles of chair and member being combined when the specifications list them separately?
About this database
The Council of State (Raad van State / Conseil d'État) is Belgium's supreme administrative court. In disputes over public procurement — from contract awards to tenderer exclusions — the Council of State is the final arbiter. The rulings in this database are summarised by TenderWolf in plain language, with practical lessons for tenderers and contracting authorities. View all rulings →