Vehicle towing: environmental permit for vehicle storage implicitly covers towing services, digital police council does not affect public order
The Council rejects the annulment action against the award of a vehicle towing contract, finding that the chosen tenderer's environmental permit allows continuous operation covering towing, and that the digital police council meeting during the COVID pandemic does not affect public order.
What happened?
The Schelde-Leie Police Zone launched an open procedure for vehicle towing across four municipalities, divided into three lots by weight. Two tenderers submitted offers. Lot 1 was awarded to Gar. Dep. V. K., lots 2 and 3 to Depannage Lybaert. Lybaert challenged the lot 1 award with two pleas. The first plea concerned the chosen tenderer's environmental permit, which allegedly did not allow operation between 7pm and 7am or on Sundays and holidays, preventing compliance with the essential 24/7 service requirement. The Council rejected this plea on multiple grounds: the Vlarem II classification list contains no separate heading for towing services; the chosen tenderer's permit covered vehicle storage (headings 15.1.1° and 15.6.1°), which implicitly includes towing; the permit contained an express authorisation for continuous operation of the establishment — only fuel deliveries were excluded between 7pm and 7am — applying to the entire facility; and the contracting authority was not required to verify consistency between the issued permit and the original application, particularly as an environmental compliance declaration accompanied the offer. The second plea challenged the legality of the digital police council meeting of 25 February 2021 (held via Teams during the pandemic), where the tender specifications had been approved. The Council found the applicant was not prejudiced — it had participated in the procedure and obtained lots 2 and 3 — and the alleged irregularity did not affect public order.
Why does this matter?
This ruling clarifies the scope of the contracting authority's regularity review regarding environmental permits. The contracting authority is not the permit-issuing authority and need not verify consistency between an issued permit and the original application. A permit for storage of accident vehicles implicitly covers towing. Additionally, a digital police council meeting during the pandemic does not affect public order.
The lesson
The contracting authority is not the permit-issuing authority and need not dig deep into environmental permits. A permit for storage of accident vehicles with continuous operation authorisation implicitly covers towing. And a procedural defect in a preparatory act that did not prejudice the applicant cannot sustain the annulment action.
Ask yourself
Did I distinguish my role as contracting authority from that of permit-issuing authority during the regularity review? Was an environmental compliance declaration included with the offer? Does the procedural defect I invoke truly affect public order, or is it a formal requirement whose non-compliance did not prejudice me?
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 →