A 'bankruptcy' from Digiflow dating from when you were 7 years old: blind trust in a database costs Verviers the award
The Council of State suspends in extreme urgency the exclusion of an architects' team from the Verviers contract because the city declared an architect 'bankrupt' on the basis of a Digiflow record that actually referred to an automotive activity closed in 2003 — and to a start date (1965) when the man was 7 years old.
What happened?
Same Verviers procedure as case 231618: the city looks for a design team for the Grand Théâtre and awards the contract to L'Escaut Architectures on 24 December 2014. One of the rejected teams is led by architects Pascal Monniez and Jean-Luc Debroux. The motivation: 'One of the partners, Jean-Luc Debroux, is in a state of bankruptcy since 2003 (email of 3 December 2014 from the Ministry of Finance).' The city relied on two sources: a Digiflow check and a confirmation by the FPS Finance. One small problem: Jean-Luc Debroux, architect born on 9 August 1958, had never been bankrupt. What Digiflow showed was a commercial activity in the automotive sector under his enterprise number, with status 'closure of bankruptcy since 29 June 2003' and a start date of '1 November 1965' — when the architect was seven years old. His registration with the Order of Architects (in his offer) said: 'Exercise: self-employed as main occupation'. The Council adds up the red flags — a registration as 'main occupation' architect, a start date older than the person, a closure 12 years old — and concludes the city should have noticed. The minutie principle required Verviers to dig deeper before excluding. The decision is suspended with immediate enforceability.
Why does this matter?
Digiflow / Telemarc is a convenient tool but is full of historical data that may not belong to the right person or that refer to a previous activity. A contracting authority that blindly relies on a red flag without checking context exposes itself to suspension and may unfairly remove a candidate. For bidders: if you are excluded on the basis of Digiflow data you know to be wrong, immediately ask to see the source and briefly explain your actual situation — for example with your professional-order registration or another authentic source.
The lesson
If you want to exclude a bidder on the basis of a Digiflow record, compare it with the other documents in his offer — a professional-order registration, prior references, identity data. Make a call or send an email before signing the exclusion decision. The difference between 'a Digiflow check' and 'a diligent Digiflow check' is precisely that extra contact.
Ask yourself
For every exclusion based on Digiflow: have I (1) looked at the record myself rather than relying on a summary, (2) checked that the enterprise-register activity is the same as the one the bidder is tendering for, and (3) given the bidder a chance to explain the contradiction?
About this database
The Council of State (Raad van State / Conseil d'État) is Belgium's supreme administrative court. In disputes over public procurement — from contract awards to tenderer exclusions — the Council of State is the final arbiter. The rulings in this database are summarised by TenderWolf in plain language, with practical lessons for tenderers and contracting authorities. View all rulings →