Application moot after withdrawal of award decision: Antwerp Fire Service withdraws award of framework agreement for cleaning and repairing firefighter clothing before hearing – costs charged to Antwerp Fire Service
The Council of State rejected the application for suspension under extreme urgency by NV D. against Antwerp Fire Service as moot and inadmissible, after Antwerp Fire Service withdrew the contested decision of 19 August 2025 on 16 September 2025 — before the hearing — which had awarded the framework agreement for cleaning and repairing firefighter clothing to a third party and declared NV D.'s tender substantially irregular — Antwerp Fire Service was ordered to bear the costs.
What happened?
NV D. filed an application for suspension under extreme urgency on 5 September 2025 against Antwerp Fire Service. The application concerned two decisions in the decision of 19 August 2025: the award of the framework agreement for cleaning and repairing firefighter clothing to a third party, and the declaration that NV D.'s tender was substantially irregular. On 16 September 2025, Antwerp Fire Service withdrew the contested decision. The Council found the application moot and inadmissible. The application was rejected. Antwerp Fire Service was ordered to bear costs of €200 court fee, €26 contribution, and €770 procedural indemnity payable to NV D.
Why does this matter?
This ruling confirms the established pattern: when the contracting authority withdraws the contested award decision before the hearing, the extreme urgency application becomes moot, but the respondent bears the costs. Notably, the contested decision here concerned not only the award but also the declaration that NV D.'s tender was substantially irregular — the withdrawal undoes both, giving NV D. a fresh opportunity in any re-tender.
The lesson
As a contracting authority, when you realise after an application that the award decision (including the decision to declare a tender irregular) is problematic, withdraw promptly — you bear costs but avoid a suspension order. As a tenderer whose offer was declared irregular, filing may prompt withdrawal of the entire decision, undoing both the award and the irregularity declaration.
Ask yourself
As a tenderer: was your offer declared substantially irregular? Consider filing — the authority may withdraw the entire decision. As a contracting authority: is the irregularity declaration sufficiently motivated? Withdrawal after an application costs you the procedural expenses.
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 →