The High Court has lifted the automatic suspension preventing the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform from concluding a 12-month contract for interpretation services. The court did not decide Word Perfect Translation Services Limited’s challenge to the proposed award to Translation.ie; it ruled only on the Minister’s application to lift the suspension.
The contract concerns interpretation services for parts of the State’s immigration service and the Legal Aid Board. Word Perfect, known in the judgment as WP, challenged the proposed award after Translation.ie was named preferred bidder in April 2017. The company’s underlying case alleges inadequate reasons, errors in the evaluation and concerns about the integrity and transparency of the tender process. The Minister denies that an Office of Government Procurement official at the centre of one complaint was involved in the second tender process.
The challenge followed a first tender competition that the OGP cancelled after reviewing it and concluding that the process was flawed. In the replacement competition, WP exceeded the 2,000-word limit for its management plan. The OGP rejected its request to submit an edited version and instead proposed assessing the submission proportionately against the limit.
The court accepted that WP had raised a fair issue to be tried. It then considered whether damages would adequately address the company’s losses if the suspension were lifted. WP said the contract loss could reduce turnover by €500,000 to €800,000, damage its reputation and cost jobs. In a later affidavit, its director Agim Gashi argued that losing interpreters for rare languages could ultimately put 91% of the company’s turnover at risk and make the business unsustainable.
Justice Noonan found that WP had not shown damages would be inadequate. He noted the contract lasted 12 months and said financial loss, reputational harm and staff losses could be assessed through damages. He also pointed to the later affidavit’s substantially expanded claim about the effect on turnover.
The judge found that damages would not be an adequate remedy for the Minister, given the potential implications for the immigration status and human rights of people seeking international protection and, in some circumstances, State security. He concluded that the balance of convenience and public interest favoured the Minister, and ordered that the suspension be lifted. The underlying challenge to the contract award was not determined in this judgment.