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extreme-urgency win — outcome: €200 court fee + €700 lawyers' costs to be paid by the Belgian State, and a procedure withdrawn by Finance itself before any further blow.
What happened?
On 1 February 2017 the chair of the management committee of the Federal Public Service Finance awarded the open call for tenders for daily and periodic cleaning of its premises in the WTC III building to BVBA Cemre (specifications no. S&L/DA/2016/141). NV MisaNet filed an extreme-urgency application on 16 February 2017. The XIIth chamber suspended the award by judgment no. 237.693 of 16 March 2017. Two weeks later, on 30 March 2017, the chair of the management committee withdrew the contested decision. MisaNet then filed no annulment application. Under article 17 §4, third paragraph of the coordinated laws on the Council of State, in such case the Council must lift the suspension by operation of law — which the XIIth chamber (acting president Johan Bovin) did on 27 June 2017. The cost order followed the 'moral winner' logic: because FPS Finance had itself withdrawn the award, the Belgian State was ordered to pay the court fee for the application (€200) and €700 in lawyers' costs to MisaNet. There was no intervening party — Cemre apparently saw no reason to intervene after the award had been withdrawn.
Why does this matter?
For contracting authorities — particularly large federal services like FPS Finance — the tactical choice after an extreme-urgency suspension matters: push on with the contested decision and risk an annulment proceeding, or withdraw and re-tender. Withdrawing typically costs €900 (court fee + lawyers' costs) but spares you a second round before the Council of State, a possible annulment judgment that returns to haunt you in case law for years, and your legal service's time. For bidders who win extreme-urgency the signal is: if the authority withdraws cleanly, you can often be satisfied with the extreme-urgency outcome and the cost award. Keep an eye on the annulment deadline though, because the suspension 'lapses' once that deadline expires without an application.
The lesson
If you withdraw an award decision as a contracting authority after an extreme-urgency suspension, do it quickly — within a few weeks, as FPS Finance did here (16 March suspension, 30 March withdrawal). The faster, the clearer that the withdrawal removed the factual basis for the proceedings, and the stronger your position if the bidder still files an annulment application. For bidders: after an extreme-urgency win followed by a withdrawal, foregoing annulment is usually the pragmatic path — but briefly weigh what you lose in precedential value for future proceedings.
Ask yourself
Did the authority withdraw the award decision within a reasonable period after your extreme-urgency win (say within 4 weeks)? If yes, and you have no further interest in formal annulment: let the annulment deadline expire and claim your €200 court fee + €700 lawyers' costs via a separate request or directly with the lifting judgment.
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 →