Podcast Location:
Download it here [file size: 30.9 MB]
Human Rights, Civil Liberties & Public Law
Procurement & Outsourcing
CPD Points:
Up to 1 point. details »

Due to the difference in guidelines between the SRA and the Bar Standards Board, CPD points are awarded differently for Solicitors, Barristers and Legal Executives:

Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

Regulated by the Bar Standards Board:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 accredited CPD point (60 minutes)

Regulated by ILEX:
Listen and pass the quiz: Gain 1 CPD point (60 minutes)
Listen only, gain ½ a CPD point (30 minutes)

  • FREE
30 minutes of audio
(+ optional 5 minute online quiz)
Plays on Computer:
Yes Downloadable as MP3:    Yes
Course Aims:

This podcast aims to give detailed analysis of the grounds for challenging public procurement contracts, the impact of recent decisions in Strasbourg and the High Court. The course further aims to examine what constitute appropriate selection criteria in the eyes of the ECJ and how rules previously considered solid have been undermined by that court's teleological approach.

After completing the course you will:
  • Know the available grounds for challenging a public procurement decision, both at Judicial Review and under EU law;
  • Understand which criteria public contractors are required to disclose to tenderors;
  • Distinguish between permissible and impermissible criteria for choosing between tenders;
  • Realise the distinction between new contracts and variations on old contracts in light of recent caselaw;
  • Know which types of contracts fall outside the public procurement regime;
  • Understand the alternative means of challenging public procurement contracts without resorting to EU law.
Specialist Difficulty: 5 of 5
Legal Principles
Legislative Updates
Panel Discussion
Sources and References:
  • Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (SI 2006 No 5);
  • C-107/98 Teckal;
  • R (Law Society) v Legal Services Commission [2008] 2 WLR;
  • 803C-454/06 Pressetext Nachrichten;
  • C-532/06 Lianakis;
  • Letting International Ltd v Newham LBC [2008] EWHC 1583 (QB);
  • McLaughlin & Harvey Ltd v Department of Finance and Personnel [2008] NIQB 25;
  • Lightways (Contractors) Ltd v North Ayrshire Council 2008 S.L.T. 690;
  • Case C-220/05 Jean Auroux and Others v Commune de Roanne [2007] ECR I-385;
  • Ordine degli Architetti delle province di Milano e Lodi and Others, La Scala C-399/98 [2001] ECR I-5409;
  • Council Directive 93/37/EEC - 'Public Contracts';
  • Chandler v Camden LBC [2009] EWHC 219 (Admin);
  • Risk Management Partners Ltd v Brent LBC [2008] EWHC 1094 (Admin);
  • Coditel Brabant SA v Commune d'Uccle C-324/07 [2009] 1 C.M.L.R. 29;
  • Council Directive 89/665 - 'The Remedies Directive'.

In this podcast James Goudie QC and Nigel Giffin QC discuss the latest developments in the law surrounding Public Procurement Contracts. The discussion focuses upon the transparency that public authorities are required to demonstrate, regarding their assessment criteria and how those criteria will be assessed in the light of recent caselaw from the ECJ. Both counsel give their forthright opinions on the directions in which this area is progressing and how public bodies should hope best to keep within the scope of the pending public contracts regulations.

Podcast Added: 19/3/2009

Podcast last reviewed: 2011-08-30

Start this CPDcast Activity

© CPDcast.com