Admissibility
The admissibility of an appeal before the Council of State is subject to strict conditions: interest in the plea, seriousness of the plea, timeliness of the appeal and payment of the court fee. Many claims fail on admissibility requirements.
Below the European threshold the contracting authority MAY allow regularisation of a missing tender form — and the applicant had three days to challenge that, not until the hearing
The Council of State dismisses Brion & Charlot's extreme-urgency suspension against the award of an intensive-care interior contract to Emil Palm, confirming that in a negotiated procedure below the European threshold a contracting authority may allow a substantial irregularity (here: a missing final offer form) to be regularised — and adding a procedural lesson: those finding their competitor's price drop suspicious must request the lifting of confidentiality BEFORE the hearing, not at it.
You filed a suspension within 15 days, cleanly motivated — but you forgot to write 'extreme urgency' in the title, so it's inadmissible
The Council of State dismisses Home 88's suspension request against the €100,000 award to Renotec because the title of the petition does not explicitly mention 'extreme urgency' procedure — even though it was filed on time and contained a section 'urgency'.
Applicant loses on urgency — but the State still pays all costs for misleading reference to article 15 of the 17 June 2013 Act
The Council of State rejects an urgent suspension request against a non-selection for a legal-representation contract of the Immigration Office because such contracts fall outside the 17 June 2016 Procurement Act under article 28 and therefore also outside the 17 June 2013 Remedies Act — but orders the State to pay all costs because its notification letter wrongly referred to article 15 of that Act and misled the applicant.
Highest bidder challenges only the irregularity finding on his own bid — and loses on standing
The Council of State dismisses the urgent suspension request of a highest bidder whose offer was found materially irregular, because he challenges only that irregularity finding and says nothing about the award to his competitor — which, in a price-only procedure, means he cannot win the contract in any event.
You let the framework agreement pass at the time — you can't later hijack a joining decision to kill the whole agreement
The Council of State recognises that a municipality's decision to join an existing framework agreement of a purchasing body is separately reviewable by a competitor — but dismisses the request because the competitor let the original framework agreement go uncontested, and the principle of legal certainty bars incidental challenge.
De Havilland knew about the award in early January but waited a month too long — UDN claim time-barred
The Council of State rejects De Havilland's suspension request against the 'Green Aircraft' defence contract awarded to the Sabena/Sonaca consortium, because De Havilland had sufficient knowledge of the award decision by 6 January 2026 but only filed on 5 February — too late.
bPost withdraws its non-selection decision just before the hearing — and foots the bill
When Italian company Logistica Paggiola launched an emergency suspension procedure against its non-selection by bPost, bPost withdrew the decision two days before the hearing — rendering the case moot, but leaving bPost to pay all procedural costs.
After the Excel formula suspension, BEP withdraws the award entirely — TEGEC wins without a fight
A year after the Council of State suspended the award to Geciroute over improper Excel error corrections (ruling 262.442), this follow-up ruling confirms BEP has definitively withdrawn the award — TEGEC recovers €1,218 in procedural costs.
Infrabel declares offer irregular, withdraws that decision as soon as the Council of State calls — and the bill stays open
Infrabel declared French company ENVU's offer irregular for a railway weed control contract, then withdrew that decision before the Council of State hearing — making the suspension claim moot, but with costs reserved pending the ongoing annulment proceedings.
CPAS Tournai withdraws award decision after challenge – suspension proceedings rendered moot
The suspension request was rejected because the CPAS withdrew the contested award decision before the hearing, meaning Damovo was no longer adversely affected. Damovo was nonetheless awarded costs.
The 60-day time limit for annulment proceedings starts from the day after dispatch of the registered letter — not from receipt
The annulment action is inadmissible ratione temporis: the 60-day time limit starts running from the day after dispatch of the notification (February 9), not from the date of receipt (February 12), making the application of April 10 one day late.
Rehabilitation motorway A15/E42 Courcelles–Gouy-Les-Piéton: application rejected due to withdrawal of award decision before hearing, Walloon Region dismissed, costs borne by SOFICO
The Council of State rejects a suspension application against the award of a motorway rehabilitation contract (A15/E42) as inadmissible, because SOFICO withdrew the award decision before the hearing — the withdrawal operates retroactively so the alleged violations did not harm the applicant. The Walloon Region is dismissed as a party and costs are borne by SOFICO.
Project designer road works Jalhay: application rejected due to withdrawal of award decision before hearing, costs borne by the authority
The Council of State rejects a suspension application against a project designer contract for road works in Jalhay as inadmissible, because the municipality withdrew the award decision before the hearing — the withdrawal operates retroactively so the alleged violations did not harm the applicant, but costs are borne by the authority.
Stating that 'procurement rules were violated' and referring to attached emails does not constitute a legal argument — not even in urgent proceedings
The Council of State rejects an application for suspension of an award for print and lettering work because the petition contained no legal argument: it merely stated 'violation of procurement rules' and referred to attached email correspondence.
Eight grounds over 104 pages in an extreme-urgency petition? The Council of State reads that as proof the case isn't serious
The Belgian Council of State rejects Etude Bordet's extreme-urgency suspension against an SWDE water-collections contract awarded to Venturis, noting explicitly that an extreme-urgency petition setting out eight grounds over more than a hundred pages is hardly compatible with the 'apparent illegality' such a suspension requires.
One word in your petition's title — 'extrême' — decides whether your suspension is even heard
The Belgian Council of State rules Digicatalyst's suspension petition against a Brussels parking-agency contract inadmissible because the petition was titled 'Requête d'annulation' and only invoked 'urgence' instead of the 'extrême urgence' mandated by Article 15 of the 2013 Public Procurement Remedies Act.
If you don't challenge a procurement withdrawal head-on, you can't attack it later through the back door
The Council of State rejects two annulment actions against a restarted procurement because the applicant is in reality attacking an earlier withdrawal decision whose lawfulness has already been definitively confirmed in prior rulings.
An unsigned internal spreadsheet as your sole proof of bankruptcy risk won't buy you a suspension
The Council of State rejects Lime's suspension action against a Brussels license award because the alleged threat to economic viability rests on a single confidential, unsigned document, and because Lime itself contributed to the damage by substantially expanding its fleet after being warned its license would expire.
An annulment action that lasts less than a month: the municipality simply withdraws — and pays €996 to the unsuccessful surveyor
The Council of State dismisses the annulment action filed by BV T. against the award decision of the Oudsbergen municipality because that decision has since been withdrawn, but orders the municipality to bear €996 in procedural costs because it was the authority that deprived the action of its purpose.
When the contracting authority withdraws after a suspension, you don't need an annulment action — and you still recover your costs
The Council of State formally lifts the earlier-granted suspension and orders Logivesdre to bear the procedural costs, because the authority itself withdrew the contested award decision — meaning the applicants did not need to file an annulment action.
If the contracting authority withdraws the contested decision, you end up as the 'winning party' — even when your appeal loses its object
The Council of State declares the action without object after the contracting authority's withdrawal, but still orders the authority to bear the full procedural costs (€1,218) because the disappearance of the contested act is treated as equivalent to an annulment.
Your suspension is a deposit, not a final victory — miss the annulment action and it evaporates
The Council of State automatically lifts a previously granted suspension because Eloy Travaux failed to file an annulment action after the 20 January 2025 suspension, and orders the contractor to bear the costs.
When the contracting authority withdraws its award after your suspension, your annulment action is declared moot — but you still recover the procedural indemnity
The Council of State lifts the extreme-urgency suspension of 24 January 2025, declares the annulment action devoid of purpose, and orders the Flemish Community to bear the costs (€1,372 to the applicant and €150 to the intervening party) because the authority itself withdrew the contested award decision after the suspension.
After a suspension the contracting authority withdraws — applicant still pockets €770
The Council of State declares Safe & Sound's annulment appeal moot after La Sambrienne withdrew its decision declaring the firm's bid irregular, and orders the contracting authority to pay all costs including a €770 procedural indemnity.
Two procedures, one indemnity: no double €770 when the case becomes moot
The Council of State declares Cohezio's annulment appeal against the award of the SEPPT contract to CESI moot after the contracting authority withdrew the decision, but grants Cohezio only one €770 procedural indemnity — not two — despite its parallel suspension proceedings.
Lose your urgent suspension and still pocket €770 — how does that work?
The Council of State declares the annulment appeal of auditor firm Callens, Vandelanotte & Theunissen against the irregularity ruling for the CAPAC auditor contract moot, and grants €770 in procedural indemnity — even though the applicant had lost its earlier urgent suspension.
A registered letter from the Council of State left unclaimed? Six years of litigation for nothing
The Council of State declares the applicant's withdrawal in a six-year-old annulment case against a selection decision by TMVW (Flemish water utility), because the applicant left a registered letter with the negative auditor's report unclaimed at bpost and then failed to file a request to continue proceedings.
Forgot to pay the €226 filing fee? Your urgent suspension is automatically dismissed
The Council of State dismisses an urgent suspension request against the award of a school renovation works package, because the applicant neither attended the hearing nor paid the €200 filing fee and €26 contribution before the close of debate.
Withdrawing your appeal isn't free — even when there's no apparent 'loser'
A contractor who withdraws its emergency suspension request against the municipality of Grimbergen asks for a refund of court fees because there is 'no losing party', but the Council of State rules that whoever withdraws is by definition the unsuccessful party — and pays.
If you bid as part of a consortium, you can't suddenly litigate alone — even if the procurement platform only shows your number
The Council of State declares Victor Cab's urgent suspension request against the award to Blue Cabs inadmissible because the offer for the Brussels disabled-passenger taxi contract worth €59.4 million was filed by the eighteen-company consortium 'GOE Victor Cab' — not by Victor Cab Ltd alone — despite the e-procurement system showing only the latter's company number.
Telling the story of what went wrong is not a legal argument — without naming the rule that was breached, you get no merits review
The Council of State rejects L.G.C. Ltd's appeal against the award by Hasselt University of a contract for nitrogen tanks because the petition merely lists facts without naming the legal rules allegedly breached — and without a legal ground, the appeal is inadmissible.
Tender notices, specifications, award decisions and signed contracts are not 'business secrets' — STIB cannot shield its camera procurement since 2000 from the Ligue des droits humains
The Council of State rejects the Brussels public transport operator STIB's suspension request against a CADA decision ordering disclosure of its camera procurement files since 2000 to the Ligue des droits humains, because urgency is lacking now that CADA no longer holds the documents.
Pluxee's urgent suspension request against Monizze award struck off for non-payment of filing fee — 770 euros procedural indemnity to the municipality
The Council of State strikes Pluxee Belgium's urgent suspension request against the municipality of Evere's award to Monizze of a four-year meal voucher contract, because Pluxee did not pay the filing fee — the request is deemed never to have been introduced, and Pluxee pays 770 euros procedural indemnity.
Parallel urgent suspension request by Siemens against SNCB's AM30 framework contract loses its purpose five days after earlier suspension in Alstom case
The Council of State dismisses Siemens' urgent suspension request against the designation of CAF as preferred bidder for SNCB's AM30 framework agreement because the same decision had already been suspended five days earlier on 17 April 2025 in ruling 263.012 at Alstom's request.
VITO withdraws its own award two weeks before the extreme-urgency hearing: the suspension claim lapses, but Mol pays the bill
After the hearing was fixed in bv S.'s extreme-urgency suspension challenge against VITO's public-cloud framework award, VITO withdrew its own award decision — causing the claim to lapse as moot and be rejected by the Council of State, while VITO still had to bear the procedural costs.
Three months after winning extreme urgency, the suspension is gone: those who don't file annulment undo their own success
Less than three months after forcing extreme-urgency suspension of the City of Beringen's award for the Beverlo cemetery-park infrastructure to V&V Infra, the Council of State lifts that same suspension — because the applicant failed to file an annulment appeal, and the old version of Article 17(4) of the coordinated laws leaves the Council no choice.
Extreme urgency without annulment is a key without a door: Council of State checks itself whether a substantive appeal was filed
Before ruling on Alarmes Coquelet's extreme-urgency suspension request against the award to Dumay-Mior, the Council of State consults its own website, finds that no annulment appeal against the same decision was filed within the statutory deadline, and reopens the debates — because this defect may undermine the admissibility of the suspension request, an issue the parties themselves had not raised.
Two letters from the registry, one ignored: Council of State dismisses damages claim because counsel didn't open the second envelope
The Council of State declares a second-ranked bidder's compensation claim concerning a Port of Brussels maintenance framework contract 'not filed' because its lawyers simply failed to open the second e-Procedure letter containing the separate €224 payment invitation — and the 'unavoidable error' plea they invoke is rejected.
Authority withdraws the decision before the hearing? Your extreme-urgency challenge is not 'devoid of object' — it is inadmissible.
The Council of State dismisses an excluded bidder's extreme-urgency challenge as inadmissible because the authority had withdrawn the contested award before the hearing — the retroactive effect of the withdrawal means the applicant is no longer legally 'prejudiced' and therefore fails the admissibility condition of Article 14 of the legal-protection act.
Brussels social housing companies are not public authorities — always check jurisdiction first
The Council of State rejects Belfoul Industrie's extreme-urgency action against a Logement Bruxellois award not on the merits but for lack of jurisdiction: a Brussels 'société immobilière de service public' is, under established case law, not an 'authority' within the meaning of Article 14 of the coordinated laws on the Council of State, so its procurement decisions fall to the civil courts — which the contract notice itself explicitly stated.
Whoever obtains a suspension but then files no annulment action loses that protection automatically — and owes the other side's procedural indemnity
The Council of State lifts the suspension earlier obtained by Jardiparc: Devillers did not file an annulment petition within the statutory deadline, so the law automatically removes the suspension — and the respondent, now regarded as the winning party, collects the €770 procedural indemnity.
If you want to attack the hardware supplier as competitor for the software running on it, do it in the initial petition — not in the supplementary brief
The Council of State rejects Vigo Universal's annulment action against the award to Timescope for developing a VR application that had to run on 'Timescope Mini' terminals supplied by Timescope: Vigo's strongest arguments — that the award criterion contained an unannounced visual sub-criterion, and that Timescope's competitive advantage from an earlier contract should have been neutralised — only surfaced in the supplementary brief and are therefore late.
A draw is not an award decision: without formal approval by registered letter there is nothing yet to challenge
The Council of State declares an urgent-suspension claim against a draw for concessions on the Eben-Emael military domain inadmissible because the specifications expressly state that allocation only becomes final after formal approval by the competent authority and notification by registered letter — formalities not yet completed here.
Asking for a tariff exemption after award: the Council of State sends you to the civil courts
The Brussels CPAS got no relief at the Council of State when it asked Bruxelles-Propreté to apply a tariff exemption during negotiations and after award – the Council declared itself incompetent: both refusals are civil matters, not administrative ones.
UDN filed, contracting authority withdraws the award — bidder wins procedurally, but with reduced procedural indemnity
After ARTES TWT/Roegiers filed on 6 February 2024 a UDN suspension plus annulment against the award to DHERTE (€21.16 million, lot 1 of the construction of the Pôle scolaire des Grands Prés), the Province of Hainaut withdrew its decision on 8 February 2024 — result: both actions become moot, ARTES receives €770 procedural indemnity (no surcharge, because withdrawal is not an annulment).
UDN against a 2022 BPOST selection and a 2023 award: BPOST withdraws both and the case collapses
French company SOLYSTIC SAS attacks by UDN both the June 2022 selection of Viapost Maintenance and the December 2023 award for the maintenance of BPOST sorting machines; BPOST withdraws both decisions on 12 January 2024, the action becomes moot and SOLYSTIC receives a €770 procedural indemnity.
Two independent grounds for rejection: challenging only one means no standing — even if your other argument is strong
The Council of State rejects the extreme urgency suspension against the non-selection of SM Constructel for the RESA/ORES smart meter contract because the applicants did not challenge one of the two independent grounds for rejection — the absence of a VCA certificate for Modal — so the contested decision can stand on that uncontested ground alone.
Federal Police win without pleadings: POLIS-SERVICE forgot to reply to the defence within sixty days and lost its appeal against the non-award of breath-test devices
The Council of State rejects — for loss of the required interest — POLIS-SERVICE's annulment action against the non-award of lot 1 of a framework agreement for portable breath-analysis and alcohol-detection devices for the integrated police, because the bidder failed to file its reply brief within the statutory sixty-day deadline after receiving the Belgian State's defence.
Suspension rejected means thirty days to say you're carrying on — Solidairement stayed silent and lost its appeal against the fruit-and-vegetables school contract
The Council of State declares discontinuance of proceedings in the non-profit Solidairement's annulment action against the Walloon Region's award of lots 13 and 17 of a framework agreement for the supply of fruit and vegetables to schools, because the non-profit failed to file a formal request to continue the procedure within the thirty-day statutory deadline after its suspension request was rejected.
Treating all bidders the same can itself be the problem: a restorer needs more inspection than a dismantler
The Council of State annuls the sale of a decommissioned Falcon 900 because Defence refused on-site technical inspection for everyone, while bidders who wanted to restore the aircraft to airworthiness needed that inspection far more than bidders who wanted to dismantle it for parts.
Council of State rejects annulment appeal against award of tennis and padel court concession in Lembeke due to lack of interest after termination and new procedure
The Council of State rejected the annulment appeal against the award of the concession for the operation and investment in the tennis and padel zone at the Lembeke sports centre to BV Padelworld, because the concession agreement had been unilaterally terminated by the concessionaire, a settlement had been reached, a new concession procedure with the same object had been launched, and the applicants had applied for the new procedure — leaving them without interest in the annulment of the original award decision.
A contracting authority that has sat on your bid for 18 months can still walk away from the contract — even when the delay was their own fault
The Belgian Council of State dismisses Krinkels' extreme-urgency challenge against SOFICO's decision not to award three road-verge maintenance contracts: 18 months after bids opened, the tenderers' binding period had expired, and Article 85 of the Public Procurement Law of 17 June 2016 gives the contracting authority broad discretionary power to walk away and relaunch — even when the delay lies entirely with the authority itself.
Signing a contract before the supervisory deadline expires: the risk that your decision still gets annulled is on you
The Council of State rejects the suspension claim of BEP against the Walloon minister's annulment of its temporary staffing contract because BEP itself signed the contract with Randstad before the supervisory deadline had expired — the alleged harms therefore do not flow directly from the challenged annulment, but from their own choice to take the risk.
Indexing your own references to clear the threshold: the Council of State doesn't fall for it
The Council of State rejects Dherte's emergency claim against the award of a €23 million school construction contract to Artes because Dherte did two things it shouldn't: applying its own price-revision formula to inflate old references above the tender thresholds, and challenging only the €20 million threshold while its non-selection also independently rested on an unchallenged €10 million reference requirement for a school building.
A municipality that will later have to declare its earthworks to the concession-holder is not, for that reason alone, a valid challenger of the concession award
The Council of State dismisses the city of Andenne's annulment challenge against the Walloon Region's award of the 'soil management and traceability' concession to the non-profit Walterre as inadmissible for lack of standing — as a future user of that service Andenne is not distinguishable from any other landowner in Wallonia who might one day excavate soil.
Suspension request rendered moot after withdrawal of fire detection maintenance award — intervening party's suspension request never enrolled due to failure to regularise
The Council of State finds there is no longer any reason to rule on the extreme urgency suspension request by SA Alarmes Coquelet against the award of the fire detection maintenance contract to CGMI-Protect, as the respondent (SCRL Toit & Moi) withdrew the contested decision of 13 October 2023 — the withdrawal is definitive because CGMI-Protect's suspension request against the withdrawal decision was never enrolled due to failure to regularise within the Article 3bis deadline, and no annulment appeal was filed.
You can challenge a tender specification, but not four weeks after publication — the clock starts on the contract notice, not on the Q&A forum
The Council of State dismisses Postalia's suspension challenge against the postal-services tender specifications of the Liège water utility CILE: the fifteen-day deadline starts running on the day the contract notice is published (21 February 2024), not on the day the contracting authority posts replies to the Q&A forum, and certainly not when the bidder itself 'becomes convinced' of an irregularity.
The 15-day deadline runs from when you became aware of the specifications, not from the answer to your question on the forum
The Council of State declares Postalia's appeal against the specifications of the Centre Hospitalier de la Haute Senne inadmissible because it was filed on 25 March 2024 — more than 15 days after Postalia became aware of the specifications (at the latest on 1 March, the day it itself asked questions about those specifications on the e-Procurement forum).
Admitting a 'misjudgment' in an email costs WattElse a wind farm project — even though this is not a public procurement
The Council of State rejects WattElse's appeal because its offer failed to respect the bestek's mandatory 1000-metre buffer to existing dwellings, and because the bidder itself admitted to a 'misjudgment' in a 20 May 2020 email — losing all standing to challenge the award to Eneco-Engie.
Annulment of ministerial refusal to sell municipal forest estate due to motivation by reference to non-appended opinion
The Council of State annuls the ministerial decree refusing the municipality of Aubange authorisation to sell the Domaine des Croisettes (136 ha of forest) by public auction, because the minister motivated the decision solely by reference to an opinion from the Department of Nature and Forests that was neither incorporated into nor appended to the decree and of which the parties had no knowledge.
Rejection of urgent suspension application for IT framework agreement due to non-payment of court fee — withdrawal after twelve days insufficient for reduction of procedural indemnity
The Council of State rejects the urgent suspension application by SA Orange Business Digital Belgium against the declaration of irregularity of its offer for an IT framework agreement of Paradigm Brussels, because the contribution and court fee were not paid before the closing of debates, and awards the base amount of EUR 770 procedural indemnity — twelve days between filing and withdrawal is not particularly short in urgent proceedings.
Council of State rejects appeals against irregularity declarations due to loss of interest — unchallenged award and non-award decisions have become final
The Council of State rejects the annulment appeals of CV LMJ Construct against the irregularity declarations of its tenders for lots 4 and 6 of a framework agreement for trailers for the federal police, because the applicant only challenged the irregularity declarations and not the non-award decision (lot 4) nor the award decision to NV A&C Noyens (lot 6), which have consequently become final, meaning that annulment can no longer lead to a chance of award.
Belgian police orders €6.7 million in next-generation trousers, loses at extreme urgency, withdraws its decision — and pays €1,218 to the Italian applicant
After SRL Cerbul obtained the extreme-urgency suspension of the award of a multi-year framework contract worth €6,720,780 for 'next-generation' trousers for the integrated police and defence (ruling n° 257.273 of 11 September 2023), the Belgian State withdrew the award on 8 November 2023, the Council of State lifted the suspension and ordered €1,218 in costs against the Ministry of the Interior.
Farys withdraws PE coupling framework contract urgently — the most powerful urgent-suspension weapon is often intimidation, not the merits
Three weeks after BV Isiflo's urgent suspension claim, the chairperson of OV Farys' board withdraws the award of the PE and water meter coupling framework contract at extreme urgency — the claim becomes devoid of purpose and Farys is ordered to pay €994 in costs.
You've challenged a public contract award? Forget to pay the €220 court fees and you lose your case without a judge ever reading your arguments
The annulment application of SA Krinkels against the award of the joint Val Benoît site contract to a competitor is struck off the roll because the company did not pay the €200 roll fee and €20 contribution within the thirty-day deadline — the case is lost without any decision on the merits.
Ten days after your urgent suspension claim, the contracting authority withdraws the award itself — and pays the costs
The Council of State dismisses NV Monument Vandekerckhove's urgent suspension claim as devoid of purpose because the city of Wervik withdrew the award to NV Francovera ten days after the filing, but orders the city to pay all procedural costs (€994).
An unreasoned notification is not an unreasoned decision — and that distinction sinks your appeal
The Council of State dismisses an appeal against the cancellation of a vehicle-towing tender because the contested decision itself was formally reasoned, even though the bidder only saw those reasons four months later — a tardiness that costs the police zone the procedural costs but does not affect the legality of the decision.
When the law names the decision-maker, you cannot sideline that authority through a public procurement procedure
The Council of State suspends RTBF's award for appointing its statutory auditor because the law explicitly assigns that competence to the French Community government — and a purely formal post-hoc approval cannot replace that government's actual decision.
When the contracting authority 'loses' your offer, your stamped envelope saves you
The Berchem-Sainte-Agathe public welfare centre awarded a medication contract to Pharma Force on the ground that 'two offers were received' — but Multipharma had filed its offer on time, as proven by a stamped envelope with date and time, and the Council of State annuls the award.
A statutory delegation clause won't save you if you don't include the delegation decision itself with your bid
The Council of State rejects contractor De Cock's appeal because he had the board resolution granting his managing director signing power published in the Belgian Official Gazette but failed to include it with his bid for the City of Charleroi — and the contracting authority is under no obligation to search the Gazette on its own.
A retracted award does not reset your UDN clock: you have 15 days for the replacement decision — not one more
The Council of State declares ARAMIS's extension of its extreme-urgency action to the replacement award decision of 21 October 2023 inadmissible due to lateness (filed on day 18 whereas article 23 of the 17 June 2013 act allows only 15 days), and shelves the case sine die regarding the retracted original decision of 13 October 2023.
The government communicates only the 'eviction' — hiding the award in the same decision. The Council of State breaks through this formalism.
The Council of State rejects the Belgian State's inadmissibility objection: a rejected tenderer who challenges only the 'eviction letter' procedurally attacks the entire award decision contained within it — even if the award itself was never formally communicated.
Winning a suspension isn't enough: if you don't bid in the replacement tender, you lose your standing — and you pay the costs
Five years after the Council of State suspended the award of the 'Silver Tower' lease to Ghelamco, the Council declares Fedimmo's annulment action inadmissible because Fedimmo (WTC IV) did not participate in the new procurement procedure launched by the Brussels Region in 2019, nor did it challenge the new specifications or the new award.
Filing a suspension within 15 days without a lawyer costs you 994 euro if 'extrême urgence' is missing from the title
The Council of State declares a graphic design firm's suspension request inadmissible because the title of the petition lacked the wording 'extrême urgence' — even though it was filed within the 15-day deadline and the contracting authority's own notification letter referred to a 'suspension request'.
Even when the auditor, the scheduling order and the opposing party all speak of 'extrême urgence', your request remains inadmissible without those words in the title
The Council of State declares Solidairement vzw's suspension request against the award of school-fruit lots to Fresho inadmissible because the title 'requête en annulation et demande de suspension' makes no mention of extreme urgency — despite warnings from the auditor, a proactive correction by the registry, and explicit extreme-urgency references by the opposing party.
Withdrawing your decision after a suspension still leaves you with the full bill
The Flemish Region withdraws its award decision itself after a UDN suspension, but is nonetheless fully ordered to pay Profacts' procedural costs — and Ipsos pays 150 euros for its intervention.
A won UDN suspension without follow-up is a lost UDN suspension
The Council of State lifts the previously ordered suspension of Lantis' selection decision because Proximus failed to file an annulment appeal within the statutory deadline — with reimbursement of procedural costs to the contracting authority as a consequence.
A social award criterion without a link to the subject matter and without a control mechanism: doubly unlawful
The Council of State annuls a road-marking contract awarded by the city of Enghien because the social-employment award criterion was not linked to the subject matter of the contract and was insufficiently precise to allow control — the winner offered 700 hours of social employment on a contract whose total work volume was estimated at barely 480 person-hours.
Selection criterion '3 references on non-navigable waterways' for an earthworks contract: not disproportionate, even if <1% of the work touches the waterway itself
The Council of State rejects TRBA's challenge against its exclusion from a Walloon contract for the construction of a retention zone on the Senne, and confirms that a selection criterion requiring 'references on non-navigable waterways' is not disproportionate when the contract is executed in such a geographical context — and that bidders must explicitly demonstrate in their offer that their references meet the criterion.
You can't 'edit out' a late offer component — if one piece arrives late, the entire offer is tainted
Intradel tried to rescue a previously-annulled award to Strabag by simply excluding the late-submitted performance note from the scoring, but the Council of State confirms that a late component poisons the whole offer — you can't reason away the contamination by ignoring the contaminated piece.
'The Price Bureau looked at it' is not a price check — especially not when that opinion itself asks for your own analysis
The Council of State suspends an award by the Walloon Region to Colas Belgium for road works in Biercée because the contracting authority motivated its price check with the bare statement that 'the Price Bureau intervened' — while that bureau's own opinion expressly required a separate analysis from the road directorate that nowhere appears in the file.
A 100 ml bottle of paracetamol is not 100 ml of storage space — Swisslog forgot the bottle, the air gap and the packaging, and lost a Charleroi hospital contract
The Council of State refuses to suspend the award of automated medication cabinets for CHU Charleroi because Swisslog Healthcare based its capacity figures on the volume of medication contents alone — not on the volume of bottles, vials and packaging — leaving its offer prima facie three drawers short on a single cabinet.
Authority withdraws award after extreme-urgency suspension — yet still loses and pays €1,216 in costs to the challenging bidder
Infrabel had on 23 August 2022 awarded a contract to TOTAL ENERGIES and declared Modalizy's bid irregular; the Council suspended under extreme urgency on 7 October (judgment 254.700), Infrabel withdrew the contested decision on 18 October and the case became moot — but the Council still ordered Infrabel to pay full procedural costs (€770 + filing fees + contribution) because a withdrawal is 'a form of substitute for an annulment in litigation'.
What 'equivalent dimensions' means is in the specifications — not in your head: three projects with two Ku/Ka 6m Cassegrain antennas isn't an example, it's the definition
The Council of State rejects the extreme-urgency action of Spanish company Indra Sistemas against its non-selection for the Defense satellite antenna procurement (Singa IV): when the specifications precisely define what 'projects of equivalent dimension' means, the bidder cannot afterwards rely on a broader reading based on its general sector experience.
Winning a suspension is only half the job: fail to file an annulment action within three months and your suspension vanishes
After Telecom Integrated Technologies NV obtained the suspension of the award to Hanssens Telecom for the Aalter telephony contract in July 2022, it never filed the required annulment action; on 5 May 2023 the Council automatically lifts the suspension — even though the municipality had already withdrawn the decision itself.
Asking for a specification change does not extend the 15-day deadline: challenge the selection criteria within two weeks of publication
The Council of State declares bailiff Alain Bordet's extreme-urgency action against the selection criteria and GDPR clause in tender specification 3380-CSC Recouvrements créances 2024-2031 of SWDE and CILE inadmissible as out of time: the 15-day deadline of Article 23, § 3 of the 17 June 2013 Act also applies to specification conditions and cannot be extended by first sending a correction letter.
Challenging non-selection pays off: Lebbeke withdraws its award and pays 924 euros in costs, even though Verhoeve Marc gets no contract
A week before the Council of State hearing the Municipality of Lebbeke withdraws its award for the Waaitjesstraat slow-road redevelopment; the Council formally dismisses BV Verhoeve Marc's extreme-urgency action for loss of object but orders the municipality to pay 924 euros in costs, including the requested procedural indemnity of 700 euros.
Action dismissed, but the university pays the bill: the economic reality of a last-minute withdrawal
The University of Antwerp withdraws its award decision for a SOAR cybersecurity platform the day before the extreme urgency hearing and halts the entire procurement procedure; the Council of State formally dismisses TrueGen's action for loss of subject matter but orders the contracting authority to bear all costs, including a procedural indemnity of 770 euros.
Rejecting bidder A for a specific shortcoming while admitting bidder B with exactly the same shortcoming is not allowed
The Council of State annuls the award of a Liège public works contract because the city declared Genetec's offer irregular for missing a detailed cost calculation of safety measures, while the winning Yvan Paque offer on that very point contained only two lump sums — without any detail.
Complaining that the specifications are unlawful while simultaneously demanding the contract be awarded to you — that does not work
The Council of State rejects a third extreme-urgency action against Ghent University Hospital: after the contracting authority withdrew earlier awards to a competitor and ultimately cancelled the entire procedure to fix a flaw in the specifications about INAMI/RIZIV reimbursement, the bidders who had themselves pointed out that flaw cannot now claim a 'direct' award.
A two-sentence 'urgency' section in your urgency proceedings costs you €770 — and the €680,000 award won't even be examined
The Council of State rejects a bailiff's suspension request without ever examining the award — the two paragraphs on 'urgency' in his application fall short of the proof obligation in article 17 §1 of the coordinated laws.
Your bid is for 4 million — but it must be signed for the framework agreement's estimated 12 million
Equans lost a 12-million-euro lot because its Division Manager and Department Manager could only sign offers up to 10 million; the Council of State rules that the relevant value is the estimated value of the entire framework agreement, not the value of the test case the bid is based on.
If you don't check your e-Notification dashboard, the contracting authority can reject your bid — 'I didn't get the email' is no defence
The Council of State dismisses the extreme-urgency challenge by Tectum Constructors against the award to SCTD for the roofs of the Mons Music Academy: when the procurement is run via e-Notification, a bidder who does not consult its restricted file on that official platform cannot later claim it missed a price-justification request — the authority is not required to prove that the bidder actually received or opened the invitation.
Pointing wrongly to 'an appeal to the Council of State' in your rejection letter cannot create that Council's jurisdiction — and costs you your procedure indemnity
The Council of State declares itself incompetent to hear Philippe Lesur's extreme-urgency challenge to the award of a scrap contract to BST, because Bruxelles-Energie — a cooperative in which Agence Bruxelles-Propreté holds only 40% of compartment A — is not an 'administrative authority', and immediately penalises Bruxelles-Energie for wrongly referring to the Council in its rejection letter by stripping it of its procedure indemnity.
You lost on 10 lots, won 1 lot via withdrawal — and still get the full procedural indemnity for that one lot
The Council of State awards Johnson & Johnson the full €770 procedural indemnity for lot 29 after ISPCC withdrew that lot — even though J&J had lost in an earlier judgment on the other 10 lots of the same procurement.
If the contracting authority withdraws after your appeal, you still get the procedural indemnity
The Council of State doesn't rule on the award of a body-cam framework contract to Proximus because the State withdrew its decision — but it orders the State to pay €700 procedural indemnity to Securitas, because withdrawal counts as 'equivalent' to annulment.
Losing the suspension AND forgetting to pursue the annulment: Newin pays 992 euros to the Province of Luxembourg for work not done
SA Newin loses its suspension against the award of the 2021-2025 ICT connectivity framework to Orange Belgium, forgets to file a 'request to pursue' within 30 days, and sees its annulment action automatically converted into a presumed discontinuance with 992 euros in costs.
Withdrawal four days before the hearing — and still a 994 euro bill: the price of a quick course change in extreme urgency
Days before the hearing, SA Entreprises Herphelin withdraws both its extreme-urgency and annulment action against SOFICO over the E429 motorway maintenance contract, but still bears 994 euros in procedural costs.
220 euros in filing fees not paid = claim struck + 700 euros to the municipality: the most expensive week in a cat-services provider's life
SRL Jonckers-Thoumsin challenged the Chièvres cat sterilisation contract award in May 2018 but never paid the 220 euro filing fee; in January 2023 the Council declares the annulment action 'non-accomplished' and orders it to pay 700 euros in procedural indemnity to the municipality.
A hospital non-profit awarding a supply contract: which court do you turn to when you want to challenge the award?
The Council of State declares the action without object after Clinique Saint Luc Bouge withdrew its award decision — but in passing makes clear that the non-profit is likely not an 'administrative authority' and that the action should probably have been lodged with the civil court.
Your bid was declared irregular? Then you can no longer challenge the award to the competitor — unless you also challenge your own rejection
Écoterres had its bid for a Walloon framework agreement for soil processing rejected as substantially irregular; the Council of State dismisses its extreme-urgency action for lack of interest in the two pleas — an important reminder of the line between 'interest in the action' and 'interest in the plea'.
After bpost files an extreme-urgency action, the Ministry of Finance quietly withdraws its award decision — and pays the costs
bpost had been downgraded from first to second place in a framework agreement for federal printing services following a recalculation; it filed an extreme-urgency action with the Council of State on 17 May 2022, and on 2 June the Minister of Finance withdrew the contested ranking decision — with costs awarded against the State.
After a successful suspension, Liège withdraws the award — and in the restart awards the contract to the original challenger
The Council of State holds the annulment action by Liège Dépannage et Services moot after the City of Liège, following a successful extreme-urgency suspension by that same bidder, withdrew its award to U.C. Automobiles, restarted the procedure and ultimately awarded the contract to Liège Dépannage itself — but still grants the challenger a €700 procedural indemnity.
STIB awards a GDPR tool to Infhotep, is suspended, withdraws — and awards the same GDPR tool to Infhotep again
The Council of State holds One Trust Technology's annulment action against STIB's award of a GDPR compliance tool to Infhotep moot because STIB withdrew the award after a successful suspension but then awarded the contract back to Infhotep — while still granting the challenger a €700 procedural indemnity.
CHR Verviers withdraws its award of medication cabinets, serves it correctly on every bidder — and the matter is finalised on the spot
The Council of State holds Touchpoint Medical's extreme-urgency challenge against CHR Verviers's €316,867.06 award of automated medication cabinets to Roba Pharma moot after the hospital withdrew its award and served the withdrawal on every bidder with proper reference to remedies, forms and deadlines — leaving no one able to contest it — while still granting the challenger a €700 procedural indemnity.
Filing no reply memorial means losing your interest automatically — even if the award decision was problematic
The Council of State rejects BV Serendipity's annulment action against the award of the supply contract for the Turnhout vaccination centre to New Balls Please, not on the merits but procedurally: Serendipity failed to file a reply memorial within the statutory sixty-day period after notification of the response memorial, and thereby automatically lost the required interest.
Winning extreme-urgency suspension is not enough — without a follow-up annulment request the suspension is automatically lifted, even if the contested award has been withdrawn
The Council of State lifts the previously ordered suspension of VDAB's award to 3S because Alfa-Zet, having obtained the suspension, never filed an annulment action — a mandatory lifting under Article 17, §4 — although VDAB still bears the costs because it had withdrawn the contested decision itself.
A withdrawn decision makes your action moot — but the contracting authority still pays 1,840 euro in costs
The Council of State declares Haezebrouck's annulment action against its non-selection for three lots of mowing and clearing works to be without object because Westkustpolder withdrew the contested decision in the meantime — but the polder bears the full procedural costs for both the successful suspension and the annulment action, totalling 1,840 euro.
The province withdrew its water-cooler award on 4 February, Aqualex filed annulment on 5 February anyway — and recovered 1,140 euro in costs
The Council of State declares Aqualex's annulment action against the award to Waterlogic of lot 1 (water coolers on tap water) of a Province of Flemish Brabant framework agreement to be without object because the provincial executive withdrew its decision on 4 February 2021 — one day before the annulment action was filed — but the province nonetheless bears all 1,140 euro in procedural costs.
Filing an extreme-urgency suspension works: six days later the Flemish Community withdraws its non-selection decision itself — and pays 920 EUR in costs to the applicant
Ikanbi Group was not selected for the Flemish multi-channel customer contact centre, filed an extreme-urgency suspension on 8 October 2020, and six days later — before the hearing — the Minister-President of the Flemish Government withdrew the non-selection decision: case dismissed as having no object, but the Facilities Agency must bear the applicant's full procedural costs (920 EUR).
Withdrawing your award decision after being sued costs you €920 — even if the applicant never wins on the merits
The Council of State holds that IPSOS's urgent suspension request against an NMBS award is moot because NMBS withdrew its award decision before the hearing — but NMBS still bears the full costs of the applicant.
A 'selection' by a selection committee is not automatically a challengeable decision — wait for validation by the competent body
The Council of State declares the application of Step Group and Mimob against the selection of a competing project on the Prés de Tilff site inadmissible: a 'décision de sélection' of a parity selection committee is here only a preparatory act, and the final decision of the competent bodies did not yet exist when the petition was filed.
A 'reservation' about air freight and customs in your masks bid wasn't a useful clarification — it was a deviation from the delivery schedule that cost you the award
The Council of State rejects I'll Be Bag's challenge against the Covid mask procurement of 50 million Community masks (awarded to Avrox and Tweeds & Cottons): tendering with 'reservations' about transport and customs on a strict delivery schedule is legally a deviation — and challenging that deviation only later, in a supplementary note, comes too late and forfeits the right to attack the remaining grounds.
A 'final' email from a Category Buyer can amount to a challengeable exclusion decision — even when the author was not authorised to take it
The Council of State suspends the exclusion of AGC Glass from the SNCB tender for M6 train window frames because the email by which a Category Buyer 'definitively' rejected the bid does constitute a challengeable administrative decision — but was taken by someone who, as SNCB itself admits, lacked the authority, leading the Council to suspend on an ex officio ground.
In a joint procurement the costs follow the actual contracting authorities — not those who only provided 'technical assistance'
The Council of State holds that BEDIMO's urgent suspension request against the award of office furniture for PEREX 4.0 is moot after withdrawal of the contested decision, dismisses the Walloon Region from the case (it provided only technical assistance), and orders the two real contracting authorities — SOFICO and the Belgian State — to share the €920 procedural costs equally.
Thirteen days between petition and withdrawal — a textbook example that filing an urgent suspension request is sometimes enough
The Council of State holds that LUX GREEN's suit against its non-selection for the redevelopment of rue des Remparts in Virton is moot — the City of Virton withdrew its non-selection decision thirteen days after the petition was filed and now bears the full €920 procedural costs.
A commitment letter from your parent company is NOT a formality — leave it out of your application and you lose the contract, even after four years of proceedings
The Council of State rejects Chantiers Allais's urgent suspension request against its non-selection for the river patrol boats: any candidate relying on the financial capacity of its parent company must include a formal commitment letter from that parent in its application — group affiliation does not suffice, and post-deadline supplements are worthless, even when the contracting authority initially missed the flaw.
If you don't request continuation after a suspension, your decision is annulled automatically — AGB Deinze let its theatre-seats award be annulled without a fight
AGB Deinze tried to award a sub-lot for theatre seats as 'additional works' to the main contractor Strabag, was suspended in October 2019, and three months later saw the entire award annulled because it failed to request continuation of the proceedings.
Announcing a new Design & Build procedure between the urgency request and the hearing makes the applicant's interest evaporate — but the City of Veurne still pays the costs
The Council of State dismisses Antwerps Architecten Atelier's challenge to the cancellation of the Veurne arts academy architect contract because the city announced a new Design & Build procedure six days before the hearing — yet still orders the city to pay the costs.
Selling a €1.17 million plot to a competitor — the lost profit you claim cannot float between €594,000 and €950,400, or there is no 'urgency'
The Council of State refuses to suspend the municipal sale of a 14,443 m² plot to Immo-3B because Caselia Development fails to substantiate its economic loss concretely — a profit range of €594,000 to €950,400 is no proof of urgency.
Withdrawing your extreme-urgency two days before the hearing still costs €920 — Dumay-Mior learns the lesson in the Toit & Moi fire-detection file
Dumay-Mior voluntarily withdrew its extreme-urgency request against the irregularity finding for its fire-detection maintenance offer to social housing operator Toit & Moi before the hearing — and was still ordered to pay the enrolment fee, the contribution and the full €700 procedural indemnity.
‘Material aid’ as an award criterion for textile collection: what happens to the collected textile after pickup still counts as ‘link with the subject of the contract’
The Council of State dismisses Recutex-Victrans’s challenge against the award to Televil because a social award criterion that measures how much collected textile a bidder makes available for poverty relief does have a sufficient link with the public contract — it forms part of the final stage of the processing chain, and in a reserved contract for social-economy operators it measures the quality of the service itself.
The Flemish Community asked for €2,800 in procedural costs after a forfeiture of action — the Council reduced it to the standard €700
Henk De Four missed the thirty-day deadline to request continuation of his annulment proceedings against being declared irregular in the Flemish Disaster Fund tender; the Flemish Community got its forfeiture, but only the basic procedural indemnity.
Lost the extreme-urgency on 26 July, did nothing in August — Heyrman-De Roeck loses its appeal against three lots of waterway maintenance and pays €1,070 in costs
Heyrman-De Roeck filed a combined appeal against three lots of unnavigable-waterway maintenance, lost the extreme-urgency request on 26 July 2019 and let the deadline for requesting continuation lapse — the Council establishes the forfeiture and orders her to pay both the principal and the intervener's costs.
A selected candidate who fails to submit a first offer is in principle out of the race — unless the contracting authority fully reopens phase two with a fundamentally amended specification
The Council of State rejects the suspension of the award of the Zorg Leuven central kitchen contract to Compass Group, because the contracting authority did not 'continue' phase two of the negotiated procedure but fully halted and reopened it with a fundamentally amended specification — allowing the other selected candidate (who had not submitted a first offer) to participate again.
Calculating the fee percentage on a fixed reference estimate rather than on the actual proposed project budget is no manifest error — it is a legitimate choice of the contracting authority
The Council of State rejects the suspension of the award of the Tournaisis police-station architecture contract to BAEB-BAG-VK Engineering, because a contracting authority that calculates the fee percentage on a common reference estimate (€10m) rather than on each bidder's individual project estimate stays within its discretionary freedom — even if the winner can thereby work with a much higher project budget (€14.3m) than the other bidders.
A 'public lease' is not a public contract: the Vandeputte brothers run into the law's scope
The Council of State dismisses the request for suspension under extreme urgency against a public agricultural lease by the Ieper PCSW (OCMW) because the Public Procurement Act does not apply — the lenient 'urgency presumption' of the Legal Protection Act 2013 is reserved for procurement and concessions above the European threshold.
Intervening to defend your contract costs you €150 even if the authority withdraws — Liantis learns it at ONE
When ONE withdrew its award to Provikmo (now Liantis) after an initial suspension, applicant SPMT received €1,140 in costs — but Liantis, which had intervened to defend its contract, must bear its own €150 intervention fee.
No annulment filed, but still €920 awarded: how an implicit withdrawal via municipal council deliberation saves Mignone from 'formalisme excessif'
Mignone obtained a suspension against Binche but never filed an annulment — yet still receives €920 in costs because Binche's municipal council deliberation halting the procurement procedure counts as an implicit withdrawal, and the Council holds it would be 'formalisme excessif' to require an additional annulment.
Request €840 in procedural costs, get €700: a withdrawal blocks any uplift above the base amount
After OTW withdrew its award to WOLF OIL, BELUB requested €840 in procedural costs — the Council awards only the base amount of €700 because article 67, §2(3) of the Regent's Decree excludes any uplift when the contested act is withdrawn.
Withdrawing your decision eight days before the hearing still costs you €920 in procedural fees
The Council of State declares SDS's suspension application moot because the Flemish Land Agency had already withdrawn its award decision — but still orders the contracting authority to pay the full €920 in procedural costs.
Damages after annulment: the principle is accepted, the amount isn't — debates reopened
The Council of State dismisses six admissibility objections against the damages claim of three 'reserve' bailiffs after the annulment of the award decisions for lots 1-4 of the Walloon bailiff framework — but cannot quantify the loss on the Walloon Region's untested figures and reopens the debates.
The 60-day deadline runs from dispatch — not from receipt, not from a double notification that wasn't required here
The Council of State declares an annulment action against an award decision inadmissible because it was filed on 3 February 2016 against a decision sent by ordinary mail on 3 December 2015 — three days late.
If you withdraw your decision after a suspension is granted, you pay the legal costs for both procedures
Defence awarded a framework agreement for printers and multifunctionals to Konica Minolta and Ricoh, Canon obtained an extreme-urgency suspension, and the minister then withdrew the award decision — making the appeal moot but also picking up the entire bill for both procedures.
Winning the suspension does not protect your award — De Vlaamse Waterweg withdraws anyway, and pays the costs
De Vlaamse Waterweg won the interim proceedings against Envisan/Jan De Nul over dredging works on the Beneden-Durme, but withdrew the award decision itself seventeen days later — making the annulment moot and shifting the costs onto the contracting authority.
Waiting for an 'implicit modification decision' until you read in the press that the winner brings a new partner — that's 60 days too late
Inter Real Estate Trusty waited two and a half months after being notified that its bid for the sale of the Muntcentrum had been rejected, then read in the newspaper that the winning consortium WCCS had brought Immobel on board, and tried to file an extreme-urgency challenge against an 'implicit modification decision' — the Council dismisses both the original decisions as out of time and the implicit modification as non-existent.
A withdrawal after filing works in your favour — but only if you actually claim costs at the hearing
Ghent University Hospital awarded a framework agreement for endoscopes to Olympus, Onis filed an extreme-urgency suspension, the hospital quickly withdrew the award itself — and because Onis told the court at the hearing that it was not claiming costs, the de facto winner ended up paying its own EUR 220 bill.
The same fact can weigh on two award criteria — as long as those criteria measure genuinely different things
Alinea Interieurarchitectuur claimed it was 'sanctioned twice' for the Flemish House in London project because its lack of international experience cost points on both 'design team' and 'references' — the Council of State replies dryly that this is not a double sanction, but the same factor being relevant for two distinct assessments.
A photo of a bicycle is not a 'description of the equipment' — and with five defects in your bid you don't get a second chance
The City of Ghent excludes SGI Security from a EUR 3 million parking-control contract because of five cumulative defects in its bid (deviating walking routes, no planning tool, only a photo of a bike, only a photo of a uniform and contradictory hourly rates) — the Council of State confirms: a contracting authority is not obliged to plug every gap in a bid with a clarification request.
When a court president strikes you off the list of sworn translators, he effectively excludes you from public contracts — but the Council of State itself is not sure it has jurisdiction
On 25 July 2014 the President of the French-speaking Brussels Court of First Instance strikes translator Benhachem off the informal list of sworn translators; after a first suspension judgment, a cassation and a referral, the Council of State now refers three preliminary questions to the Constitutional Court — is a striking-off from such a list a 'public-procurement act' or not?
Contracting authority withdraws its decision before the extreme-urgency hearing: application 'rejected' but you still recover 920 euros
OVAM withdraws the contested award decision eight days before the hearing after Terra Engineering & Consultancy files an extreme-urgency application; the Council of State rejects the application as moot but orders OVAM to pay roll fee, contribution and 700 euros procedural indemnity.
Winning an extreme-urgency suspension and then failing to file an annulment: three months later the Council of State automatically lifts your own suspension
Antwerp Recycling Company suspends the award of a framework agreement for construction and demolition waste in late October 2018, fails to file an annulment afterwards, and four months later watches the Council of State lift its own suspension under art. 17, §4(3).
A bailiff firm wins the extreme-urgency suspension, forgets the annulment and pays its opponents 920 euros — while the Council lifts the suspension
BVBA G. De Wilde suspends in September 2018 the award of lot 1 of the Ghent bailiff services contract to the GDW-Gent/Modero joint venture, fails to file an annulment, and four months later watches the Council of State lift its suspension under art. 17, §4(3).
The Council reopens the debate — and then the contracting authority just withdraws: you win 920 euros, your intervening competitor pays its own roll fee
CVBA Vergauwen & Helderweirt files an extreme-urgency application in September 2018 against lot 1 of the Ghent bailiff services contract; the Council reopens the debate, but on 11 October 2018 the City of Ghent withdraws the award decision itself, leaving the application moot and the intervening parties to bear 300 euros of roll fee themselves.
Not showing up at your own UDN hearing costs you the suspension — but you keep the €700 indemnity
Gilles Moury attacks the award of a military construction project to Wust, Defense withdraws the award two weeks later, but Moury fails to appear at the hearing a year later, which procedurally rejects the suspension — yet she still receives €700 indemnity because the withdrawal had already made the Belgian State the losing party.
You win because the contracting authority withdraws — but asking for €5,600 gets you €700
Bruxelles-Environnement withdraws its award decision after the Council had already ordered suspension, so CERAA wins the annulment proceedings — but its claim for €5,600 in procedural indemnity (max amount, doubled for suspension + annulment) is reduced to the base amount of €700.
One judgment for suspension and annulment when the contracting authority withdraws mid-stream — no continuation tax
Cofely Services attacks an irregularity finding and an award by the Federal Police via extreme-urgency suspension; when the police withdraw the decision during the proceedings, the Council handles suspension and annulment in a single judgment without Cofely needing to file a continuation request or pay the related tax.
Ask the base amount, get the base amount — a €700 case wrapped up in twelve weeks
Intermédiance & Partners files an extreme-urgency suspension against Momignies' award of a bailiff services contract to an individual; the municipality withdraws within two weeks, and the Council grants exactly the €700 indemnity the applicant requested without discussion.
Suspension won, annulment lost over a single missed deadline — and the procedural indemnity is split
The temporary partnership Putman Frères/Stapotech won the suspension of the Leietheater award in March 2018, but ten months later lost its interest for the annulment because it filed no explanatory memorandum within the sixty-day period — the Council splits the costs: the contracting authority pays for the extreme-urgency phase, the applicants for the annulment.
Two bidders challenge the same award: the Council suspends for the first and adjourns the second sine die — as an insurance policy
On the same day the Council suspends the award to VENTURIS on application of INTERMÉDIANCE & PARTNERS, it handles EURO FIDES's parallel extreme-urgency application against the same decision — not by dismissing it as moot, but by adjourning it sine die so EURO FIDES retains its own procedural protection should the first suspension later fall away.
A university-college non-profit applying public procurement law does not thereby become an 'administrative authority' — the Council of State has no jurisdiction
ITZU Cleaning went to the Council of State because its rejection letter said so, but UC Leuven and UC Limburg are private non-profits without unilateral binding decision-making power towards third parties — the Council has no jurisdiction, although UCLL is ordered to pay the costs because it misled the applicant.
After a suspension, the contracting authority often simply withdraws the award — and the annulment claim becomes moot, but you still get your procedural costs
The municipality of Ans had awarded its external prevention service contract to PROVIKMO; after SPMT-ARISTA obtained a suspension, the municipality withdrew its award decision and the annulment claim became moot — but SPMT-ARISTA is treated as a 'successful party' and is awarded €700 in procedural costs plus €400 in other costs.
Withdrawing your award decision to dodge a suspension judgment still costs you €1,500 — to the Council you remain the losing party
The Council of State holds that the action has lost its purpose because Etterbeek itself withdrew the contested non-selection decision, but still orders the municipality to pay €700 procedural cost award plus €800 court costs — because withdrawal is treated as a substitute for annulment — and refunds €800 to the bidder who had paid the registry fees twice.
Suspension granted, then the contracting authority withdraws — the suspension must be lifted, but the authority still pays €900
The Council of State lifts its earlier suspension of the award to Lambert Frères/Deumer/Mathieu because Bastogne itself withdrew the contested decision and no annulment action followed, but still orders the city to pay €700 procedural cost award plus €200 court costs — withdrawal remains a 'substitute for an annulment in litigation'.
Withdraw your contested award and immediately re-award to the same firm — legally allowed, but you pay the costs of the first action and trigger a second one
The Council of State holds that Illico's action has lost its purpose because the Haute Ecole Robert Schuman itself withdrew its contested award to Vending Euro Products on 18 June 2018 — even though the same instrument also re-awarded the contract to that same firm — and orders the school to pay €700 procedural cost award plus €220 court costs; meanwhile the re-award itself was also challenged and suspended.
Withdrawing your case isn't always losing — when the contracting authority signs a settlement with 'procedural costs on its account', that can mean the full €1,390
The International Polar Foundation withdrew its annulment action against a Council of Ministers procurement decision after settling, and the Council of State imposes the €840 procedural-cost award plus €550 court costs on the Belgian State — not on the withdrawing applicant.
Going bankrupt mid-procedure? Then your damages claim has to be on the table from day one — wait, and you lose everything
The Council of State dismisses the appeal of the bankrupt company Belgaze against its non-selection and the award of a VMW framework agreement: because Belgaze had not filed a damages claim under article 11bis with or during its annulment action, its standing to sue evaporated when bankruptcy was declared.
Withdraw your award decision after a successful suspension? You still pay the costs
The Council of State dismisses the annulment appeal against the award of a EUR 21.7M quay wall in Zeebrugge because the contracting authority had already withdrawn its award decision — but charges all procedural costs and lawyer's compensation to the Maatschappij van de Brugse Zeehaven.
Withdrawing a framework-agreement award after a suspension: appeal moot, but EUR 1,140 in costs to the city
The Council of State declares Roto Smeets Belgium's annulment appeal against the framework-agreement award for printing the City of Antwerp's magazine to Roularta moot — the city had already withdrawn its decision after an earlier extreme-urgency suspension and now bears all procedural costs.
File an extreme-urgency suspension and don't show up: request rejected, three pages later
The president of the VIth chamber rejects Eureca Mobile's extreme-urgency suspension request because neither the requester nor its lawyer attended the hearing — automatic default under article 11 of the Royal Decree of 2 April 1991.
Lost your extreme-urgency appeal? Don't forget to request continuation, or the annulment procedure dies on its own
After the Council of State on 25 January 2018 dismissed ABO's extreme-urgency appeal against a framework agreement of De Vlaamse Waterweg, ABO forgot to file a request to continue — result: presumption of abandonment and EUR 900 in costs.
Auditor proposes dismissal: no continuation request within 30 days = abandonment and EUR 900
Trigion challenged the award of the FOD Finance's security services contract, but after first auditor Jos Stevens proposed dismissal of its appeal, it forgot to file a request to continue — result: presumption of abandonment and EUR 900 in costs.
Four out of five JV members is not enough — one absentee makes the appeal inadmissible
The Council of State declares an extreme-urgency appeal by four architecture firms against the award of the Brussels Music Conservatory project (13 July 2018) inadmissible because the fifth member of their joint venture — SWECO Belgium — did not join the action, and the 'subcontracting cooperation protocol' did not sufficiently prove that SWECO had actually withdrawn from the joint venture.
You can complain about the absence of a price check even if you submitted the lowest bid — and a comparative price table is not a price check
The Council of State suspends the award to Malysse of a framework contract for the rental and maintenance of workwear for VIVALIA because the administrative file nowhere shows that the contracting authority carried out an effective price check, and rules that even Servitex — the lowest bidder — has standing for this plea.
Withdrawing an award decision to dodge an extreme-urgency procedure — and still paying the costs
When a contracting authority withdraws its contested award decision during a suspension procedure and that withdrawal becomes final, the Council of State holds that the application has lost its purpose, but still orders the authority to pay 1,700 EUR in procedural costs because the withdrawal acts as a 'substitute for an annulment'.
An amicable settlement during a document-access procedure: mutual waiver of procedural costs is valid, but the EUR 200 filing fee stays with the withdrawing party
The Council of State records Energys' withdrawal after it reached an amicable settlement with the municipality of Habay-la-Neuve over the refused communication of tender documents for a biomass district-heating contract — a mutual waiver of procedural costs is accepted, but the EUR 200 filing fee remains payable by the withdrawing party.
If you trail by 8.01 points and can recover at most 8, you don't even get a substantive ruling
The Council of State rejects Conceptexpo's suspension request against the award to Potteau for a furniture contract for the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences because, even if all challenged points were corrected in its favour (gaining 5 points itself, removing 3 from Potteau), it would still finish 0.01 points behind the winner — and a plea with no possible impact on the ranking is no plea.
First suspended, thirteen months of silence, then withdrawn anyway: the Port of Antwerp pays 2,200 EUR for two years of litigation
The Council of State had already suspended on 22 November 2016 the award of dredging works in the 4th Port Dock to Martens en Van Oord; the Port of Antwerp waited until 18 December 2017 to withdraw the decision itself — and now bears 2,200 EUR in costs for both the extreme-urgency and the annulment procedure.
Withdrawing your annulment action five months after the hearing date: 900 EUR for the contracting authority
Dileoz brought the City of Vilvoorde before the Council of State on 15 September 2017 over a 36,980 EUR recruitment software contract awarded to A&S Solutions; after all briefs were exchanged and the audit report drafted, Dileoz withdrew on 6 February 2018 — and must pay 900 EUR in procedural costs to the City.
Withdrawing the award one day before the hearing: case dismissed, but the hospital pays 920 EUR in costs
AZ Sint-Jan Brugge-Oostende withdraws on 18 April 2018 — the day before the extreme-urgency hearing — its award to Gerechtsdeurwaarders BTO for the amicable collection of patient invoices; the Council of State holds the application has lost its purpose but orders the hospital to pay 920 EUR in costs and the intervening bailiffs to pay 150 EUR in court fees.
A police HQ from 8 to 12 million euros: the Council of State refuses to rule on amendments when the 'in house' arrangement was never put on paper
Four members of the Boraine police council challenge a 550,000 EUR amendment and a 11.8 million EUR final account for a police HQ in Colfontaine originally awarded for 8 million; the Council of State declares itself incompetent because the 'in house' delegation to IDEA was contractual — even though the contract was only signed 18 months AFTER provisional acceptance.
Two suspension actions against the same award decision on the same hearing day — what does the Council do with the second?
When Misanet and Köse Cleaning each demand a suspension on the same hearing day against the same Brussels award decision, the Council suspends the award once (in judgment 241,061) and adjourns the second case sine die, so that Köse remains protected if the suspension in 241,061 is later lifted.
Waiting for the full evaluation report does not stop the suspension clock from running
The Council of State dismisses as out of time an extreme-urgency suspension against the designation of a preferred bidder in a PPP negotiation procedure: the fifteen-day period had already started to run on 27 November 2017, even though the temporary partnership only obtained the complete evaluation report on 16 January 2018.
'We meet all the requirements' is not a legal ground — an extreme-urgency petition must cite specific articles
The Council of State rejects PanStreet's appeal due to inadmissible legal grounds: vague claims that 'specifications were not respected' without reference to specific provisions of the specifications or which deviations were wrongly accepted do not meet the formal requirements of an extreme-urgency petition.
You can't challenge specifications you only downloaded on the bid opening day
The Council of State declares INSTELE's appeal inadmissible: contradictions between the contract notice and the specifications (3 vs 24 months duration, 6 vs 7 December as opening date) do not turn the specifications into a challengeable 'decision' — INSTELE knew of the tender from 22 November but only downloaded the specifications on 6 December and asked no questions.
The contracting authority withdraws its award decision and still pays — a withdrawn act is a 'substitute for annulment'
The Council finds that Arcadis Belgium's appeal against the award of the Arlon mobility plan to TRANSITEC has lost its object because the Walloon Region withdrew its award decision on 4 May 2017, but nevertheless orders the Region to pay €700 procedural indemnity and €200 in other costs because the withdrawal constitutes 'a form of substitute for annulment'.
Claiming in a pre-litigation letter that the winner used 'wrong measurements' can backfire — unless you put it in your application
The Council reopens the debate in VMG-De Cock's challenge to the award to Himpe (€2,671,181 for the new local services centre De Mantel in Zwijnaarde) and rejects OCMW Ghent's argument that VMG's own bid would be irregular because she based her price on a different undermining width than the bill of quantities — a legal appreciation in a 26 October 2016 letter does not bind the Council.
Intervene to defend an award that's later withdrawn? Then you share in the costs — €150 on your name
The Council finds that INSTANCES' annulment appeal against the award of lots 'public procurement law' (€16,528.93 excl. VAT) and 'public/administrative law on urban planning' (€33,057.85 excl. VAT) to lawyer Marie Bourgys by the city of Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve lost its purpose after withdrawal, awards INSTANCES the €700 base procedural indemnity — and orders €200 in other costs against the city plus €150 against intervening lawyer Bourgys.
Want to plead 'we're a poor authority' to cut your costs order? Not without proof — and certainly not if you yourself consulted lawyers before withdrawing
The Council finds that INTERMÉDIANCE & PARTNERS' extreme-urgency appeal against two CENTR'HABITAT decisions (urgent extension of the previous bailiff contract and launch of a new specifications procedure) lost its purpose after withdrawal, but rejects CENTR'HABITAT's lengthy plea to cut the €700 base procedural indemnity to the €140 minimum — and awards the full €700 (€350 per applicant) plus €400 in other costs.
Four days after the extreme-urgency request, STIB withdraws its award decision — but still pays €900 to BELGORAIL
The Council finds that BELGORAIL's extreme-urgency request against STIB's 25 April 2017 decision not to retain its bid for monitoring the construction of MR-M7 metro trains lost its purpose after withdrawal, and orders €700 procedural indemnity plus €200 other costs against STIB.
Two bidders, both lacking the required certificates — yet the rejected bidder still has standing to seek suspension
The Council suspends the award to AGS Coussaert of lot 6 (packaging of diplomatic cargo) of the Federal Public Service Foreign Affairs: both the absence of an explicitly required bank statement and of two explicitly required certificates (ISPM15 and SEI/HPE) in the winning bid were left unmotivated in the award decision — and the contracting authority cannot hide behind the fact that BKSI's own bid was also incomplete, because with two bidders BKSI gets a new award opportunity if both are rejected.
The contracting authority withdraws five days before the hearing — and itself acknowledges that 'the arguments in the appeal cannot be contested'
The Council stays the proceedings and adjourns sine die after CAHC withdraws — two days before the extreme-urgency hearing — its award of the architect contract for a Stoumont/Trois-Ponts retirement home, citing 'arguments in the appeal that cannot be contested' — a textbook example of how an extreme-urgency appeal makes a contracting authority fold without any merits ruling.
Skip your own extreme-urgency hearing? Your suspension is dismissed automatically — even if the contracting authority already withdrew its decision
KITRY challenged the award of an EMPREVA IT contract to EONIX, but failed to appear at the rescheduled hearing of 7 September 2017 — result: suspension dismissed, even though the contested decision had already been withdrawn two months earlier.
The contracting authority withdraws its award during your suspension procedure — and you get a 700 euro procedural indemnity for free
DUO Catering challenged the award of a school catering contract to TCO Service; before the hearing, the OCMW of Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve withdrew the decision — result: case moot, but full procedural indemnity and costs charged to the OCMW.
If you only attack your own exclusion and leave the higher-ranked bidders alone, you have no interest left
The Council of State rejects Ethias's extreme-urgency application against its exclusion in a Federal Pension Service hospital-insurance tender without ruling on the merits — Ethias was not the lowest bidder for any lot and did not raise any ground against the regularity of the higher-ranked AXA and AG Insurance, so even a winning application could never have got it the contract.
Failing to compare yourself with the winners loses your case
The Council of State rejects an extreme-urgency application by an architect joint venture against Ghent University's selection of five other study teams for a €29.6 million student housing project — not because the reasoning was flawless, but because the petitioners nowhere concretely show why the five selected were not better than they.
Two grounds for exclusion? One weak link can break the whole decision
The Council of State suspends the award of shower-renovation works to RECO+ because the Communauté française excluded VAEL on a combination of a tax debt that the tax administration itself had repeatedly denied existed, and a Social Security debt that did stand up — but without saying that either ground sufficed on its own, the weakest link drags the whole decision down.
You win in extreme urgency, the authority withdraws its decision, and you think you're done? Watch out: without an annulment application, the suspension lapses automatically
The Council of State lifts a previously ordered suspension of an award by the City of Genk because Trendhuis filed no annulment application after its extreme-urgency win — but Genk still has to pay the court fee and €700 in costs because it had withdrawn its decision itself.
Lose extreme urgency at the federal Finance Ministry? Withdraw your award and pay €900 — no annulment proceedings, no stain on the file
The Council of State lifts the suspension of the award to Cemre for the cleaning of the WTC III building (Federal Public Service Finance) because MisaNet filed no annulment application after its extreme-urgency win — outcome: €200 court fee + €700 lawyers' costs to be paid by the Belgian State, and a procedure withdrawn by Finance itself before any further blow.
Filed your annulment four days too soon — and you pay €200 in court fees for proceedings that lapse for lack of subject matter
Shanks Belgium won extreme urgency on 24 January 2017 against IMOG's award to DEME for the processing of waste-incinerator residues, filed an annulment application on 17 February 2017, and saw IMOG withdraw the contested decision four days later on 21 February 2017 — outcome: the Council declares the proceedings without object and orders double court fees (€400) plus €700 lawyers' costs against IMOG.
An increased lawyers' costs award (€2,800) is not granted by claiming the authority 'knew it was wrong' — you must adduce concrete circumstances
The Council of State lifts the suspension of an award by the Province of Flemish Brabant to BVBA Geerts for waterway maintenance works, and grants only the basic €700 in lawyers' costs — not the requested €2,800 — because Audenaert adduced no concrete circumstances justifying the fourfold uplift.
Withdrawing a tender notice without clear communication costs you €1,500 — even when the Council declares the action 'devoid of purpose'
The Council of State finds that an extreme-urgency action against a launch decision by the municipality of Dilbeek is devoid of purpose because the municipality had already withdrawn the decision ten days before the action — yet it orders Dilbeek to pay €1,500 in costs because that withdrawal had never been clearly communicated to the bidders.
Withdrawing an award decision after an extreme-urgency action costs you €700 procedural indemnity plus the docket fee — even though no one wins on the merits
The Council of State finds that Coca-Cola European Partners Belgium's extreme-urgency action against the award of a vending-machine concession to Pelican Rouge is devoid of purpose because the federal Finance Ministry has withdrawn its award decision in the meantime — and orders the Ministry to pay the docket fee and €700 procedural indemnity, since Coca-Cola counts as the 'successful party'.
Withdrawal before judgment in an ordinary suspension action — no cost recovery as in extreme-urgency cases with withdrawal
The Council of State records that BVBA ASBO withdraws its ordinary suspension action against the award of a green-maintenance contract to De Vlieger for €972,300.01 excl. VAT, without ruling on costs or procedural indemnity.
Attaching outdated articles of association to your bid is having your own bid declared void — and the contracting authority is not required to protect you against it
The Council of State rejects Blue-Mobility's extreme-urgency action against the City of Ghent's award of the bike-sharing contract to vzw Bycykel, because Blue-Mobility's bid turned out to be signed by a proxy whose authority came from a director who, under the amended — but not attached — articles of association, had no power to represent the company.
Crossed out the binding clause on the bid form? Then you submitted no bid, even if you signed everything else
The Council of State rejects Horeservi Catering's extreme-urgency action against the award of a four-year framework agreement for student catering to Prorest, because on the bid form the essential clause by which the bidder commits 'on its movable and immovable property' to performing the contract had been crossed out — no commitment, no bid, no interest.
Not every public contract goes to the Council of State — a free Catholic school is not an administrative authority for its public procurement
The Council of State declares itself incompetent to hear an extreme-urgency action by two architectural firms against the award of an architecture contract by a free Catholic school (asbl Collège Sainte-Marie), because an award decision by such a private asbl creates no obligations toward third parties and the school is therefore not an administrative authority within the meaning of article 14 — challenging such an award requires going to the civil courts.
If you know the auditor finds your winner's permit unlawful, you cannot rush the award — even under the presumption of legality
The Council of State suspends the Port of Antwerp's award of 8 million euro of dredging works in the 4th dock to Martens & Van Oord, because the Port — despite known auditor reports finding the crucial OVAM permit unlawful — did not wait for the Council's ruling before proceeding.
One unpaid 200-euro filing fee — and the entire suspension proceeding is deemed 'not undertaken'
The Council of State deems ACB-WJ Product Services' extreme-urgency suspension against the Flemish Region's award to Trafiroad 'not undertaken', because the 200-euro filing fee was never paid — not even after the auditor explicitly warned the applicant.
Two procedural errors by the OCMW — yet no suspension, because without a proven impact on the ranking there is no standing
The Council of State refuses to suspend the OCMW Jodoigne's award to TCO Service for meal delivery to Le Clair Séjour, because ISS Catering shows neither through the unverified honour declaration nor through the 'impossible' 10.59% VAT rate that it should have won the contract.
Suspension automatically lifted because no annulment was filed — and yet the applicant still gets the procedural indemnity
The Council of State lifts the previously ordered suspension because no annulment action followed, but still orders the Belgian State to pay 700 euro procedural indemnity and 200 euro costs because, by a corrective decision of 22 July 2016, the State implicitly admitted that the original tender conditions had been set by an authority that was not competent.
Contracting authority withdraws its award after the Council suspends? The case becomes moot — and you still pay 700 euros in procedural costs
After a suspension order against the award of a lot for legal recovery services, ORES Assets and RESA withdrew their award decisions; the Council of State declares the annulment action moot, lifts the suspension, but charges the procedural costs to the contracting authorities.
A case ending without object still costs 700 euros — and when there are multiple applicants, there are clear rules for splitting the indemnity
On the same day and in the same context as arrest 236.111, ORES Assets and RESA also withdrew their award decision for lot 8 (Mons); the Council of State declares the action moot, but explains how the procedural indemnity is shared among four jointly-filing applicants.
Withdrawing your urgent suspension at the last minute? You still pay the court fee and the other side's procedural costs
IGEMO filed an extreme-urgency suspension against an award decision by the Flemish Region, withdrew four days before the hearing, and was ordered to pay 200 euros in court fees plus 700 euros in procedural indemnity to the defendant.
No reply to the auditor's report within 30 days? Appeal lost — and 900 euros of costs
When the Council of State serves an auditor's report recommending rejection, the applicant has thirty days to request continuation of the procedure — silence creates a legal presumption of withdrawal, and the applicant pays the costs.
Suspension denied? The 30-day clock starts ticking — silence costs you 900 euros
Eurotech Benelux loses not only the contract but also pays 900 euros in costs because, after its suspension request was denied, it failed to file a request to continue the proceedings within the legal 30-day deadline.
The other side's last memorandum is not an extension — your 30-day clock runs separately
Groentotaal loses its annulment action against the non-award of the Kasterlee green-maintenance contract because, even though the municipality filed a final memorandum, it failed to file a continuation request within 30 days of the auditor's report — total cost: 900 euros plus any chance at the contract.
Auditor's report proposes dismissal — silence costs you the intervening party's fees too
Joëlle Salens loses her action against the award of the towing contract to BVBA Antak because, after the auditor's report proposed dismissal, she failed to file a continuation request within 30 days — leading to a costs order in favour of both the contracting authority and the intervening successful bidder.
Two companies in joint venture wanting to intervene? Pay 150 euros twice — otherwise no intervention
MONUMENT HAINAUT and MONUMENT VANDEKERCKOVE jointly try to intervene against the suspension of their award by the City of Charleroi, pay only one 150 euro fee for the two requesters — and see their intervention declared inadmissible.
A denied suspension is not the end — fail to continue within 30 days and you owe 700 euros to the other side
BLUE PLANET PROMOTIONS loses its annulment action against the rejection of its offer for police promotional items — not on the merits but because, after losing the suspension, it failed to file a request to continue the proceedings, and is hit with 900 euros in costs on top.
Your offer was 915 euros cheaper than the winner — and you still lose your suspension over one missing line above the signature
Dranken Pede comes within 916 euros of Inbev Belgium's winning offer for a three-year water contract at Aalst's public welfare centre, but loses its suspension without any review on the merits: the offer was signed by 'Mark Pede in his capacity as director', whereas only the company bvba Pede was statutorily authorised to bind the bidder — a substantial and unfixable defect that voids the offer and removes any standing.
If you think the selection rules are unfair, file at the Council immediately — don't wait until the winner is in sight
MICAS, the outgoing casino operator of Middelkerke, argued that the municipality's integrated DBFMO design — bundling construction with operation — squeezed solo gambling-hall operators out of the market, but because it attacked the design eighteen months too late instead of at the announcement, the Council of State holds it has no standing.
Withdrawing your award decision after a suspension request? You're still the losing party — and you pay the costs
The City of Liège withdraws its award decision during a pending extreme-urgency procedure; the appeal becomes moot, but the contracting authority bears the procedural indemnity and other costs as if it had lost the case.
Vlarema requires municipalities to conclude an agreement with a recycling centre — that creates no monopoly and does not displace the procurement law
ILVA awarded the collection of household textile waste for ten years exclusively to three recycling shops on the basis of an alleged 'statutory delegation' under the Flemish Vlarema regulation, but the Council of State suspends: neither the 2005 recognition decree nor article 5.1.7 of Vlarema confers an exclusive right on recycling centres — a public procurement procedure was required.
Excluded for tax debt? A VAT credit relating to the closed quarter can save you — even if the document is dated after the opening
The City of Brussels excluded MW-Cars from a school transport contract because it had over €3,000 in tax debts on 7 January 2016 and its VAT declaration only reached the City on 18 January, but the Council of State suspends the exclusion: the €21,517.30 VAT credit related to a quarter closed before opening and therefore existed on the opening date.
The decision to launch a tender procedure is not subject to appeal — not even by the incumbent service provider
The International Polar Foundation tries to suspend the Council of Ministers' decision to launch a negotiated procedure for logistical support of the Antarctic BELARE campaigns, but the Council of State dismisses the appeal as inadmissible: a decision to launch a procedure is merely preparatory and produces no definitive legal effects for potential bidders.
Suspension granted, decision withdrawn: the annulment action loses its object — and the 20% bonus on procedural costs is gone
When the contracting authority withdraws its award decision after the Council of State has already suspended it, the subsequent annulment action loses its object — the applicant still receives the basic procedural indemnity of 700 euros, but not the 20% surcharge that the Procedural Regulation grants to a 'normal' winner.
Justifying a price by saying 'this is what my subcontractor charges' is no justification — and miss the 30-day clock after a rejected suspension, and you lose your annulment too
Wanty's bid for the rehabilitation of the Oignies mine site was declared irregular because three items had been justified by simply pointing to the subcontractor's price — a justification that does not satisfy art. 21 of the RD of 15 July 2011 — and after the extreme-urgency suspension was already rejected, Wanty filed no request to continue the annulment within 30 days, so the Council of State records the abandonment of the action.
A 'maintenance contract' for cycle paths sounds like services — but the CPV code decides, and CPV 45233141 is works
The Council of State rejects the extreme-urgency action by a cleaning company without contractor accreditation against the award to Sotraplant of the maintenance contract for the cycle paths of Namur province, because a contract under CPV 45233141 'road maintenance works' is works — not services — and a bidder without personal accreditation cannot be awarded the contract, even if its subcontractor presents a (partly fitting) accreditation.
If you want a suspension, first prove that there is something to suspend
The Council of State dismisses the extreme-urgency suspension request brought by eleven judicial officers against the alleged award of penal-fines collection to the Gerhanko firm, because they fail to show that the contested award decisions even exist — an email invitation to a software demo and a self-drafted account of a phone call are not enough.
Lost your extreme-urgency suspension? Don't forget to request continuation within thirty days — otherwise you have, by law, abandoned your entire action
After the Council of State rejected its extreme-urgency suspension, PRESTA SERVICES did not within 30 days request continuation of the annulment procedure — under article 17, § 7 of the Council of State laws this triggers a legal presumption of desistment and closes the entire action.
Social housing, public procurement, millions in renovation work — and yet incompetent: a Brussels SISP is not an 'administrative authority' for the Council of State
When challenging an award decision of a Brussels public real-estate company (SISP), the Council of State declines jurisdiction — a Brussels SISP is not an administrative authority within the meaning of article 14 of the Council of State laws, so rejected bidders must turn to the civil court, even when the award concerns a public works contract for 58 social housing units.
No board decision, no appeal — the CEO's signature alone is not enough
The Council of State dismisses VigotecAkatherm's challenge to the gas-detector contract awarded to Dräger without examining the merits, because the application was signed only by the managing director while the company's articles reserve the decision to sue to the board of directors.
Withdrawing after a UDN suspension: you don't just lose the contract, you also pay EUR 900 to the bidder
After the Council suspended the award to FLUX of Ostend's Christmas lighting contract (judgment 232.491), the city withdrew the award decision — whereupon the Council declared the subsequent annulment action without object and ordered the city to pay EUR 200 in court fees plus EUR 700 in basic procedural indemnity to the applicant, without the increase that normally applies for the combination suspension + annulment.
You won your urgency suspension, but forgot the annulment action — then the Council lifts your suspension automatically
Two months after the Council suspended in extreme urgency the award to SCA Hygiene Products of the three-year framework agreement for incontinence material at the public welfare centre of Kampenhout (judgment 233.088), it lifts that suspension automatically because ONTEX failed to file an annulment action within the legal deadline — a purely procedural automatism that did no harm in this file because the welfare centre had already withdrawn the award decision in the meantime.
You challenge your non-selection — but let the award to a competitor pass. What then?
A non-selected candidate for the truck toll system tender litigates against its non-selection but lets the award to Sky-ways stand unchallenged — the Council applies the Amec Spie doctrine and declares the action no longer admissible.
A 'concession' without real operating risk is just a public service contract — but if you don't claim extreme urgency, you can't suspend it
Charleroi's public welfare body launched a 'service concession' for managing its food procurement, but the Council of State requalifies it as a public service contract — even though the suspension is still rejected because the application did not mention 'extreme urgency'.
A food supplier cannot suspend a procedure to appoint a purchasing agent because it never intended to win that role
BIDVEST — a food supplier — could not obtain an extreme-urgency suspension against the appointment of a 'partner' for food procurement because it lacked the standing to fill that role, and the ordinary suspension failed for lack of urgency.
Forget 'extrême urgence' in the heading of your application — and your entire suspension case dies on a single typographic error
The Council of State refuses to suspend the award of a clothing contract to a social workshop because the applicant didn't identify the application as 'extrême urgence' in the heading — turning it into an ordinary suspension, which is simply inadmissible for public procurement.
Claim your procedural compensation no later than 5 days before the hearing — otherwise the request is late, even if you win the case
The Walloon Region withdrew the contested award decision before the annulment ruling; the Council declared the action moot, but refused the €2,800 procedural compensation because the applicant only requested it at the hearing.
Lowest price with a submersible pump that doesn't meet the specifications: technical non-compliance costs you the standing to litigate
The Council of State dismisses the extreme-urgency challenge by the joint venture WeGroSan/Antea against the awarding to Sportinfrabouw, because the joint venture — the lowest bidder at 1.39 million euros — submitted three items technically non-compliant with the specifications (submersible pump, irrigation control cabinet, sports underlay) and failed to contest this finding in its petition, depriving it of standing to challenge the award.
Three pages of approach against seventeen: an offer that refers to the specifications gets 6 out of 40
The Council of State refuses to suspend the award of a contract for the preparation of the Flemish primary-care conference to Möbius, because Ghent University submitted only three pages of offer for the criterion 'quality of the approach plan' — largely cross-references to the specifications — while Möbius delivered seventeen pages of detailed methodology, making 6 out of 40 versus 40 out of 40 a defensible point allocation.
Challenging a non-profit's award before the Council of State? Wrong court — time wasted
The Council of State declares itself incompetent to hear an emergency suspension against the award of lot 7 (sanitary cells) of a Ciney nursing home: the contracting non-profit is not an 'administrative authority' under article 14, §1 of the coordinated laws, and the competent court is the civil court.
Even if you let your appeal lapse by not requesting continuation, the authority pays your roll fee if it withdrew first
The Council of State finds Fire Technics presumed to have abandoned its appeal after a rejected emergency suspension — but still orders the Kontich municipality to pay the €200 roll fee because the municipality had meanwhile withdrawn the contested award decision.
Lose your emergency suspension, do nothing, and the authority bills you €900 for the privilege
The Council of State finds OIL nv presumed to have abandoned its appeal after its emergency suspension against the award of the Jabbeke bridge painting to De Medts was rejected — and orders OIL to pay €200 roll fee and €700 procedural indemnity to the Flemish Region.
If you request documents via both freedom-of-information and art. 877 Judicial Code, you implicitly pick one track
The Council of State declares itself incompetent to rule on Jérouville's appeal against SRWT's partial refusal to provide documents about modifications to the Charleroi metro contract, because Jérouville was already requesting the same documents via art. 877 of the Judicial Code in her damages procedure before the Namur court.
For public procurement at the Council of State, there's only one track — emergency suspension, nothing else
The Council of State rejects Niezen Traffic's suspension request against a €5,541 radar contract from the Brunehaut municipality because it was filed under the 'ordinary' procedure, while public procurement only allows the emergency suspension procedure.
Two of four partners cannot drag the temporary association to the Council of State alone
The Council of State dismisses the emergency suspension request against the award of the Halle al Chair (Namur) restoration design because only two of the four original members of the temporary association 'Sébastien Mouffe Subway - Carole Brunin' had filed the appeal.
Won a suspension earlier? Make absolutely sure to file the annulment in time — otherwise your win evaporates
The Council of State lifts the earlier suspension (judgment 229,104) of a CPAS Brussels medicines procurement because the applicants never filed an annulment request — and refuses the requested procedural indemnity because the amount was never specified.
If you withdraw your award after a UDN is filed, you still pay the costs — even if the case becomes 'moot'
The City of Antwerp withdrew its award to Ferro-Seaport after Wolters-Mabeg filed for extreme urgency — the Council dismisses the application as moot, but still orders the city to pay €700 procedural indemnity and €200 court fee to the applicant.
Refusing to bid because the specifications are 'clearly unlawful' and then complaining — the Council calls that a lack of diligence
A competitor that filed no application for the reissued helihaven concession and only sought suspension four months after publication came up empty — anyone who genuinely considers a tender specification unlawful must first raise it with the authority or the Council, not let the deadline lapse and then complain.
An authority that did not know the winner needed a licence cannot say 'the rival should have warned us'
The Council of State annuls the award of parking-meter emptying to Apcoa Belgium because Apcoa, since a 2012 amendment, did not hold the required private security licence — a public order law the authority itself should have checked at selection.
Track public tenders?
Receive daily relevant tenders tailored to your business. Including AI summaries, competitive analysis and market intelligence.
This page shows all rulings of the Council of State (Belgium's supreme administrative court) on admissibility in public procurement. Each ruling is summarized by TenderWolf in plain language, with a legal lesson and a practical question to ask yourself. View all rulings →