A bailiff firm wins the extreme-urgency suspension, forgets the annulment and pays its opponents 920 euros — while the Council lifts the suspension
BVBA G. De Wilde suspends in September 2018 the award of lot 1 of the Ghent bailiff services contract to the GDW-Gent/Modero joint venture, fails to file an annulment, and four months later watches the Council of State lift its suspension under art. 17, §4(3).
What happened?
On 16 August 2018, the executive college of the City of Ghent takes an award decision (no. 2018_CBS_09689) in the public services contract for 'legal debt-collection services rendered by bailiffs in connection with enforced recovery by warrant or for ad hoc assignments concerning various types of claims of the City of Ghent, OCMW Ghent and the Centrum Emergency Zone (2 lots) – Bailiffs 2018'. Lot 1 is awarded to the joint venture formed by BVBA GDW-Gent and NV Modero. BVBA G. De Wilde files an extreme-urgency application on 31 August 2018. On 18 September 2018 the Council of State suspends the contested decision in judgment no. 242,362 — De Wilde wins round one. De Wilde then fails to file an annulment. The City of Ghent reacts: by college decision of 11 October 2018 it withdraws the contested decision. When the parties appear on 22 January 2019, acting president Johan Bovin applies art. 17, §4(3) of the coordinated Council of State laws: without annulment the suspension must be lifted. The suspension of judgment no. 242,362 disappears. The cost question remains. Because the City of Ghent itself withdrew on 11 October 2018, the Council finds it equitable to charge the costs to the City: roll fee (200 euros), contribution (20 euros) and the requested 700 euro basic procedural indemnity for De Wilde. The intervening parties GDW-Gent and Modero — who had joined the defence — are ordered to pay the intervention costs: a 300 euro roll fee, half each. Practical outcome: De Wilde achieved the desired effect (the award to its competitor disappeared after the Ghent college decision) but lost the suspension itself. The intervening winners also paid their own intervention roll fee.
Why does this matter?
The bailiff sector is a small market where you know your competitors personally. Those who litigate extreme urgency here often do so thinking 'the suspension is enough — no one will follow up'. This judgment shows why that is a costly misconception. First: without an annulment your suspension is automatically lifted — art. 17, §4(3) leaves the Council no margin. Second: an intervening party that aligns with the contracting authority and helps defend the case does not necessarily recover its intervention roll fee (150 euros per party here; 300 euros combined) when it 'wins' the lifting — if the contracting authority has meanwhile withdrawn, the intervening party simply pays itself. For bidders without specialised procedural counsel this is a warning: an extreme-urgency strategy without an annulment follow-up is legally incomplete, even when it sometimes 'works' in practice because the contracting authority withdraws on its own.
The lesson
If you win an extreme-urgency suspension against an award decision, file an annulment within the 30-day period (or general 60-day deadline). Build the annulment during the extreme-urgency phase — the documents are fresh, the facts documented, the legal pleas already drafted. Cost of forgetting: you lose the suspension when it comes to a hearing. For intervening parties that defend as 'winning' bidder: even when the Council lifts the suspension, you may end up paying your own intervention roll fee (150 euros per firm) when the contracting authority has withdrawn meanwhile.
Ask yourself
Have you won an extreme-urgency suspension in the past 30 days? Walk through the timeline with your counsel today: has the annulment been filed and notified?
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 →