70 points for service, 30 for price in a book tender: acceptable when the market justifies it
The Council of State dismisses Standaard Boekhandel's challenge against the award to Distri-Bib for the Antwerp public library's book framework, accepting that service may weigh 70 out of 100 points because 85% of deliveries fall under the regulated book price.
What happened?
In October 2022 the City of Antwerp launched a framework agreement for supplying book collections to its public library, split into three lots (adult fiction, adult non-fiction, youth). Award criteria were price (30 points) and service (70 points), with the latter broken down into subcriteria such as 'general description' (15 p), 'ordering process quality' (10 p), 'digital service' (15 p) and 'sustainability' (10 p). Three bidders submitted offers; a first award decision in February 2023 was withdrawn after a calculation error (price before discount was used for lot 3). On 26 May 2023 Antwerp again awarded all three lots to Distri-Bib. Standaard Boekhandel challenged this with four pleas: a method of evaluation allegedly fixed only after opening the offers, vague and overlapping subcriteria, a disproportionate 70/30 weighting on a simple supply contract, and uneven application of the criteria (testing only the applicant's website). The Council rejected all four. The crux: Antwerp justified the 70/30 split by pointing to the Flemish decree of 23 December 2016 establishing a regulated book price for the first six months after publication — covering some 85% of expected deliveries — which structurally limits competition on price. In that market context the Council found the weightings reasonably representative of the contract. Costs of EUR 994 were ordered against Standaard Boekhandel.
Why does this matter?
The ruling gives contracting authorities a workable handle for departing from a 'standard' price/quality balance when the market warrants it. It is no licence to push price aside, but a confirmation that a substantiated story about market conditions — statutory pricing, limited number of suppliers, highly standardised products — can carry a shift toward quality criteria. For bidders, an unusually low weight on price is not automatically attackable: you must show that the weighting prevents identification of the most economically advantageous tender, not merely that you would have preferred another split.
The lesson
If a tender document weights service or quality far above price in a way that surprises you, first check whether the contracting authority has a market rationale that supports it. For books that is the regulated price; for medicines it may be RIZIV tariffs; for telecoms it may be a specific distribution structure. If no such reasoning appears anywhere — not in the specifications, not in a clarification — there is room for a request to motivate. But don't expect the Council of State to find a 70/30 split disproportionate on its own.
Ask yourself
For a supply contract where price weighs less than 40% of the score: can the contracting authority explain which market feature structurally limits price competition? If not, raise the question before the deadline for questions — not after the award.
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 →