Four days after the extreme-urgency request, STIB withdraws its award decision — but still pays €900 to BELGORAIL
The Council finds that BELGORAIL's extreme-urgency request against STIB's 25 April 2017 decision not to retain its bid for monitoring the construction of MR-M7 metro trains lost its purpose after withdrawal, and orders €700 procedural indemnity plus €200 other costs against STIB.
What happened?
On 25 April 2017 the Board of Brussels' public transport company STIB decided not to retain BELGORAIL's bid for a public service contract — a 'mission de contrôle, de surveillance et de reporting bimensuel' for the construction of future MR-M7 metro trains. BELGORAIL filed an extreme-urgency suspension request on 18 May 2017. The case was scheduled for hearing on 7 June 2017. Days later — by letter of 29 May — STIB informed the Council that the contested act had been withdrawn. The withdrawal decision itself dated from 23 May and was notified by registered letter on 31 May to all bidders. The case was postponed sine die. No bidder — including BELGORAIL — appealed the withdrawal within the time limit. An order of 11 October 2017 set the case for a hearing on 7 November to deal with costs. The ruling is brief: as the withdrawal has become final, BELGORAIL's appeal lost its purpose. For costs the Council applied the familiar reasoning: 'the disappearance of the contested act, consequence of its withdrawal, constitutes a form of substitute for a contentious annulment', so STIB must be regarded as the losing party and BELGORAIL as the prevailing party. STIB advanced no element justifying reduction of the requested €700 base indemnity, which was awarded in full. The €200 other costs (docket fee) were also charged to STIB. Total bill for STIB: €900.
Why does this matter?
This is a textbook example of the most common extreme-urgency outcome in public procurement: the contracting authority withdraws the contested decision as soon as the appeal arrives, hoping to avoid substantive debate. For bidders this is useful to know: even without a pronounced annulment you obtain €900. For contracting authorities it is a cost-benefit analysis: a quick withdrawal spares you a suspension or annulment ruling with substantive reasoning, but standardly costs €900 plus the time for re-tendering. The ruling also illustrates how fast the entire procedural cycle can play out: appeal 18 May, withdrawal decision 23 May, notification 31 May — less than two weeks between appeal and de facto end of the case.
The lesson
Was your bid rejected and you filed an extreme-urgency appeal, and the contracting authority withdraws the contested decision? Then ask in any event for the €700 base indemnity plus the €200 other costs — both are awarded quasi-automatically as long as no specific counter-argument is advanced. You do not need to pursue your application with a continuation request; the Council will rule on costs in the same 'lost purpose' ruling. For contracting authorities: a 'quick' withdrawal to avoid an extreme-urgency procedure standardly costs €900 — factor it in.
Ask yourself
Has the contracting authority withdrawn your contested rejection or award decision after your extreme-urgency appeal, and has no bidder challenged that withdrawal in the meantime? Then your right to €700 procedural indemnity and €200 other costs is acquired — request it explicitly in your final submission or by simple letter to the Council.
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 →