Experience travels with the people, not the company registration number
A tenderer can rely on experience gained by its directors and staff at a previously acquired sole proprietorship to meet an experience requirement, provided there is a clear link — such as the acquisition of assets, trade name and know-how.
What happened?
Erasmus University College Brussels awarded a framework agreement for the technical management of its exhibition stand. The losing tenderer challenged the award on four grounds: the chairman was not competent to take the decision, the winning tenderer (incorporated in 2017) could not meet the ten-year experience requirement, the evaluation committee did not function properly after a member's retirement, and the re-evaluation after withdrawal of the first award decision led to unexplained score differences.
Why does this matter?
The judgment addresses four distinct themes, each relevant to daily practice. Most notably, the Council accepts that experience need not have been acquired within the same legal entity when there is a clear link through the acquisition of assets, trade name and know-how, and the people who carry the experience are actively working for the tenderer. Additionally, the judgment confirms that a contracting authority may apply a different — more correct — evaluation methodology in a re-evaluation, even if this leads to significantly different scores.
The lesson
Experience requirements in selection criteria concern actual capability, not the age of a company registration number. A company that acquires a business including trade name, references, know-how and the people who did the work can invoke that experience — provided the link is clear. Anyone challenging this must concretely demonstrate why the transferred experience is not representative of current capability.
Ask yourself
When challenging a competitor's experience: does our criticism target the company registration number or the actual capability of the people behind the tender? If we acquired a business: do we have all relevant evidence (asset purchase agreement, references, staff continuity) ready to substantiate our experience? When comparing a re-evaluation: do we compare the substantive strengths and weaknesses, or merely the scores between the old and new evaluation report?
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 →