Procurement in a Nutshell: Parkingeye Ltd v Velindre University NHS Trust & Anor [2026] EWHC 1019 (TCC)
8th May, 2026
The first legal judgement under the Procurement Act 2023 has gone through the courts. The case relates to an application to lift an automatic suspension. Unlike the PCR 2015, under the Procurement Act, an automatic suspension is only available during the standstill period.
Case summary
The court was required to determine how the new test operated for lifting the automatic suspension in a procurement award challenge case.
The claimant company had provided car park management services for the second defendant university health board. It was responsible for maintaining parking services for five different NHS Trusts in Wales. The first defendant university NHS Trust carried out a public procurement process, under the PA 2023. The procurement was on behalf of the second defendant in respect of a proposed five-year contract for car park management services.
The claimant’s bid was unsuccessful. During the statutory standstill period on the award of the contracts under section 51, the claimant issued proceedings under pt 9 against the defendants for alleged breach of statutory duty. It sought orders setting aside the award and awarding it the contract, and a declaration that the defendants had acted unlawfully.
As a result of the proceedings, the defendants were automatically prohibited under s101(1) from concluding the contract with the successful bidder. The claimant issued a second, materially similar, claim. The defendants applied for an order under s102(1) lifting the automatic suspension.
Judgement
The application to lift the suspension was refused. The judge concluded the statutory suspension and the new test for applications to lift suspensions are intended to ensure that proper weight is given to public interest in ensuring that public contracts are awarded in accordance with the law and that the courts do not too lightly lift the suspensions.
Key observations from the case:
- We are no longer looking at the American Cyanamid Principles and in particular the previous position where the adequacy of damages for the Claimant being the main test has fallen away. Rather the Judge said that we are now looking at a test where “the principle is directed to the importance of awarding contracts lawfully, not to responses to unlawful awards”. We read that as recognising a public interest that, where the lawfulness of an award of contract is disputed, the contract should not be awarded until that dispute has been determined.
- The new test requires balancing the public interest against suppliers’ interests, with weight determined case by case. This may be harder for the Contracting Authority as they can no longer say “damages are fine here” which could be the case even where there has been an unlawful award.
- In this case, the Court did say that damages would be an appropriate remedy but acknowledged that wasn’t the main test anymore (the Claimant obviously preferred that the contract be awarded to it)
- Claims of reputational damage have to pass a high threshold. There remains a need for cogent evidence of irrecoverable financial losses, especially since the court found “the respondent’s position would be vindicated if the court concluded that it ought to have been the successful bidder”.
- The Court also stated that the final judgement could reasonably be achieved by the end of the year, there was no threat to the continued supply of public services. Proceedings were issued on the 19 January and the application to lift on the 19 March.
For further information please contact Melanie Pears or Tim Care in our Public Sector Team.
Procurement and public law update
Date: 14 May 2026
Time: 9.am – 11.30 am
Location: Ward Hadaway, 10 Chapel Walks, Manchester, M2 1HL, UK
Our in-person Procurement and Public Law Update covers the new procurement rules and their increased transparency requirements.
This seminar will look at what those changes have meant in practice since both the new Act and the new NHS regime came into force. We will give practical tips on how to manage procurements now and how to deal with the risks of challenge when the timescales are so tight.
Register here to join this free session with procurement law experts Tim Care and Matthew Brady.
Please note that this briefing is designed to be informative, not advisory and represents our understanding of English law and practice as at the date indicated. We would always recommend that you should seek specific guidance on any particular legal issue.
This page may contain links that direct you to third party websites. We have no control over and are not responsible for the content, use by you or availability of those third party websites, for any products or services you buy through those sites or for the treatment of any personal information you provide to the third party.
