The Lifeline Project was a well-regarded charity. Failure to carry out the targets within the contracts led the charity into insolvency and resulted in a personal, 7-year disqualification order.
In a consultation paper issued in early March, and giving only a month for responses, the Department for Business Innovation & Skills (BIS) consulted on proposals for any company wishing to bid for public contracts to be required to identify their “beneficial owners”. A “beneficial owner” will include anyone holding more than 25% of the shares in the company or having significant rights to influence it, for example, by appointing a majority of the board. This is currently the test for UK companies to register “people with significant control” and provide details of them to Companies House.
The consultation suggested four “options” to require bidders to provide “beneficial ownership” information:
- to require non-EU companies to register their beneficial ownership information centrally and then to require all bidders to refer to the relevant register when either responding to the standard PQQ or submitting a European Single Procurement Document (ESPD). The non-provision of this information would then be made a ground to exclude the bidder from the procurement;
- to require non-UK companies to provide beneficial ownership information direct to the contracting authority;
- to treat a failure to provide beneficial ownership information as making a bid incomplete or non-compliant; or
- to make it a condition of awarding a contract that beneficial ownership information is provided.
We responded to the consultation, saying that the main problem with all of these options is that, under the public procurement case law, it is difficult to add further exclusion grounds unilaterally. If a contracting authority tries to exclude a bidder for a failure to provide information which the Public Contracts Regulations (or their Utilities and Concessions equivalents) do not require bidders to provide, this would clearly open up the contracting authority to a procurement challenge.
We also highlighted the fact that there could be significant administrative costs for contracting authorities if they were required to “go looking” for beneficial ownership information or were to have to check it.
We suggested that, if the Government wishes to make it a condition of tendering that beneficial ownership information is provided, they should lobby the European Commission to change the public procurement Directives to allow for this. There was ample opportunity to have done this in the two-year consultation period leading to the 2014 public procurement Directives, and this is a pity that the Government did not address this then.
We are happy to provide a copy of our full response to the consultation to anyone who would be interested to receive one.
For more information
Contact Andrew Millross.
On 23 July, trainees from Anthony Collins Solicitors will host an ‘experience day’, which will involve various activities and presentations, with lawyers and non-lawyers from across the firm.
The Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) has launched a new scheme specifically for charities and not-for-profit organisations who want to advise EU citizens on UK settlement.
In the second part of our series on contract management pitfalls, we look at the risks and opportunities presented by payment mechanisms in construction contracts.
Under most construction contracts, the contractor takes on the ground conditions risk. However, a recent case has demonstrated that the risk can fall on the employer.
The UK Government has been consulting on how it should promote social value in its procurements. Here is our response that we submitted to the consultation...
The Tenant Fees Act 2019 came into force on 1 June 2019.
A recent case in the Court of Appeal will no doubt bring a sigh of relief for employers, but a corresponding sigh of disappointment may be uttered for equality and gender balance in the workplace.
This briefing assists response to the consultation paper by outlining the consultation questions, providing some background information and prompting some thoughts and potential answers.
A report published on 29 May by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has found that since 2009-10, local government spending on services has fallen on average by 21% in real terms.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.