Suspension application and annulment appeal moot after withdrawal of meal voucher award decision — costs charged to respondent
The Council of State rejected the suspension application and annulment appeal by NV E. against the award by OV Farys of lot 1 of a framework agreement for electronic meal vouchers, after Farys withdrew the award decision of 4 September 2025 on 21 October 2025, rendering the application moot, with the annulment appeal sharing the same fate under article 30 §5 and costs charged to the respondent.
What happened?
Farys awarded lot 1 of an electronic meal voucher framework agreement on 4 September 2025. NV E. filed a single petition seeking both suspension and annulment on 10 October 2025. Before the hearing, Farys withdrew the award decision on 21 October 2025. The suspension application became moot; the annulment appeal shared the same fate under article 30 §5. Farys was ordered to pay costs including a procedural indemnity of €770.
Why does this matter?
This ruling illustrates that when a single petition contains both a suspension application and an annulment appeal and the contested decision is withdrawn, both are rejected under article 30 §5. The respondent bears the costs.
The lesson
When the contracting authority withdraws the contested decision after an appeal, both the suspension application and the annulment appeal are rejected but costs are charged to the respondent.
Ask yourself
Have you verified whether the contested decision is still in force or has been withdrawn?
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 →