Introduction
The rule of fairness in public procurement processes means all bids submitted following the stated rules must be fully reviewed. This basic rule comes from the common law duty of fairness and applies even if an invitation to tender (ITT) clearly says the authority does not have to accept the lowest or any bid. The legal rules for bidding processes focus on openness and equal treatment, requiring authorities to act honestly and without bias. Main requirements for a valid bid include meeting deadlines, giving all needed information, and matching the set criteria. Not reviewing a valid bid may lead to claims for breaking this duty.
The Facts of Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club
The Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club had operated pleasure flights from Blackpool Airport for years under licenses from Blackpool Borough Council. When the license ended, the Council asked for bids for a new license. The Aero Club sent a bid that met all requirements. However, due to an administrative error, their bid was not reviewed. The Council awarded the license to another group.
The Court of Appeal's Decision
The Court of Appeal found the Council broke its duty to review all valid bids. Lord Justice Bingham said the invitation to tender created a legal duty to check all bids sent through the correct process. While the Council kept the right to pick the best bid or reject all bids, this choice did not let them ignore properly submitted bids. The error in handling the Aero Club’s bid made the process unfair.
Effects on Public Procurement
The Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club case set a central rule in public procurement law. It confirmed the duty to review all valid bids exists even if the ITT states the authority does not have to accept any bid. This supports the need for openness and equal treatment for all bidders. The case also showed the importance of reliable administrative steps to avoid mistakes that leave out valid bids.
The Duty of Fairness and Honesty
This case stresses the wider rule of fairness and honesty in contractual dealings, especially in public procurement. Courts will check public authorities’ actions to ensure they meet these standards. Authorities must review bids fairly and without bias. Signs of unfair treatment or favor may lead to legal challenges.
Practical Advice for Bidding
Groups involved in bidding should carefully study ITT documents and follow all instructions exactly. Keeping clear records of all communications and submissions is important. If questions arise about fairness in the process, getting legal advice quickly can help protect rights. Knowing the result of Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club helps bidders ensure their bids are reviewed properly.
Differences from Other Cases
The Blackpool & Fylde decision is not the same as cases where authorities clearly keep the right to ignore bids based on set terms. For example, if an ITT says bids over a certain cost will be rejected, the authority may dismiss those bids. The main difference is that in Blackpool & Fylde, the Aero Club’s bid was missed due to an error, not because it failed to meet criteria. The case focuses on fair process rather than bid content.
The Role of Administrative Steps
Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club shows the key role of clear and effective administrative steps in public procurement. Setting up reliable systems for receiving, tracking, and reviewing bids lowers the chance of errors that could result in legal claims. These systems should include checks to confirm all valid bids are reviewed. Recording each step of the process helps show compliance with fairness duties.
Conclusion
The Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club Ltd v Blackpool Borough Council case stays a key example in UK public procurement law. It confirms the implied duty of authorities to review all properly submitted bids, even if the ITT states they do not have to accept any bid. This rule, based on fairness and honesty in contracts, protects bidders and supports the fairness of public procurement. The case also highlights the need for effective administrative practices to prevent errors that harm fairness. The judgment gives clear guidance for authorities and bidders, supporting open and equal procurement processes. Similar cases like R v Lancashire County Council, ex parte Hudspeth [1986] 85 LGR 400 give more details on local authorities’ procurement duties. The rules from Blackpool & Fylde continue to shape public procurement law, setting clear expectations for fair and open awarding of public contracts.
