CPAS Tournai withdraws award decision after challenge – suspension proceedings rendered moot
The suspension request was rejected because the CPAS withdrew the contested award decision before the hearing, meaning Damovo was no longer adversely affected. Damovo was nonetheless awarded costs.
What happened?
The CPAS of Tournai awarded a supply contract to Balteau for the installation of a nurse call system, telephone exchange and wifi coverage in two care homes. Damovo Belgium, the unsuccessful bidder, filed for suspension under the extreme urgency procedure. Before the hearing on 4 February 2026, the CPAS withdrew its award decision (on 29 January 2026). The withdrawal had retroactive effect.
Why does this matter?
This ruling illustrates an important tactical pattern: a contracting authority withdrawing its award decision once proceedings are initiated. The withdrawal renders the application moot, but the applicant is still considered the successful party for costs purposes – an acknowledgment that the challenge forced the authority to reconsider.
The lesson
For contracting authorities: a withdrawal after a challenge avoids an adverse ruling, but you bear the costs. Consider whether your specifications and evaluation will hold up before awarding, not only once challenged. For bidders: a swift urgent suspension request can force an authority to reconsider a flawed award, even if the case is formally dismissed.
Ask yourself
Would my award decision survive an urgent suspension challenge, or will I end up withdrawing it at the first sign of opposition?
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 →