The Claimant applied for judicial review of the decision of Winchester City Council to authorise variations to a contract with a developer to build a new mixed retail, residential and transport centre in the heart of Winchester city centre. As a councillor, he sought to challenge the decision to authorise variations of a contract between the council and a developer on the ground that there had been a failure to comply with the 2006 Regulations.
Held: It is well-established that a direct financial or legal interest is not required to establish standing to bring a claim for judicial review: R v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex parte National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd  AC 617, at 694B-C; R v Secretary of State for the Environment ex parte Rose Theatre Trust Co.  1 QB 504, at 520D. Although there is a specific remedy for economic operators under the 2006 Regulations, this does not preclude claims for judicial review by those who are not economic operators (e.g. R (Law Society) v Legal Services Commission  EWCA Civ 1264).
This claim is distinguishable on the facts from R (Chandler) v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families  LGR 1, where the court held that the claimant lacked standing to bring a judicial review claim because she did not have any interest in the observance of the public procurement regime, being motivated by her political opposition to academy schools. In contrast, the Claimant in this case does not pursue any ulterior motive. He seeks what the procurement process is intended to provide, namely, an open competition to allow Winchester to select the development which best fulfils its needs.’
Lang DBE J
 EWHC 231 (Admin)
Public Contracts Regulations 2006
England and Wales
Cited – Good Law Project Ltd and Others, Regina (on Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Admn 18-Feb-2021
Failure to Publish Contracts awards details
Challenge to alleged failures by the Secretary of State to comply with procurement law and policy in relation to contracts for goods and services awarded following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held: The contracts had been awarded under . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 March 2021; Ref: scu.542486