Ninove itself withdraws the kitchen contract of the Klateringen care home: Aramark's urgent action loses its object, but the city pays the costs
After Aramark had sought, under extreme urgency, the suspension of the decision of 5 December 2022 by which the city of Ninove awarded the operation of the central kitchen of the Klateringen residential care centre to Sodexo Belgilux, the executive committee itself withdrew that award decision on 9 January 2023 — leaving the Council of State only to find that the action had lost its object and to place the costs, including a 700-euro procedural indemnity, on the city.
What happened?
On 5 December 2022 the executive committee (vast bureau) of the city of Ninove decided to award the public supply contract for the 'Operation of the central kitchen WZC Klateringen' to Sodexo Belgilux. Aramark, a competing bidder, did not accept this and lodged an action for suspension under extreme urgency on 20 December 2022. The parties were summoned to a virtual hearing via Teams on 17 January 2023. It never came to a hearing on the merits: by decision of 9 January 2023 — over a week before the hearing — the executive committee itself withdrew the contested award decision. The Council of State could therefore only find that the action had lost its object, or at least that Aramark had lost its interest in it. The action was dismissed, but on costs the Council was clear: 'in the given circumstances' it is appropriate to place them on the defending party. The city of Ninove bears the roll fee of 200 euros, the contribution of 24 euros and a procedural indemnity of 700 euros owed to Aramark.
Why does this matter?
This short judgment shows a pattern every procurement lawyer recognises: a contracting authority that, faced with a solid extreme-urgency petition, re-examines its own award decision and withdraws it before the Council rules. For the bidder this may look like an empty box — no judgment on the pleas, no suspension — but in reality it is often the fastest form of victory: the contested award disappears and the contract must be redone, without months of litigation. The costs ruling confirms that the Council does not treat the withdrawal as a neutral fact: although the action is formally dismissed, the city is ordered to pay all costs as the de facto losing party. Whoever withdraws the decision implicitly concedes that something was wrong — or at least assumes the litigation risk of it. The judgment also illustrates the speed of the extreme-urgency procedure: from award (5 December) through petition (20 December) and withdrawal (9 January) to judgment (17 January), barely six weeks passed, holidays included.
The lesson
For bidders: a well-founded extreme-urgency petition can do its work before any judge rules on it — an authority that sees its file wobble sometimes pulls the plug itself. In that case, persist through to the costs ruling: the procedural indemnity (here 700 euros) and the roll fee are yours, even though your action is formally dismissed. For contracting authorities: withdrawing a challenged award decision is a legitimate way to correct a shaky procedure and prevent worse, but expect the bill — the costs of the proceedings you provoked stay with you. So weigh before the award, not after: a thorough regularity and reasoning check costs less than a withdrawal under litigation pressure.
Ask yourself
Do you know that a withdrawal of the contested award decision renders your extreme-urgency action without object, but that as applicant you can still recover the costs and the procedural indemnity? After filing, do you actively monitor whether the authority withdraws the decision, so you know in time where you stand for the re-tender? And as a contracting authority: before notifying the award, did you have your reasoning and regularity check critically reviewed — knowing that a later withdrawal under litigation pressure leaves you with the full costs?
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 →