首页> 外文期刊>Building >Letters & comment
【24h】

Letters & comment

机译:信件和评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Surely under the decision in Turning Point v Norfolk County Council (assuming the basis of the potential claim relates to the appointment of Mark Thurston announced on the 26 January) Mace are now beyond the 30-day time limit to have formally issued proceedings (Mace hires QC in HS2 row, 14 March). In particular the case noted that the fact that a tenderer becomes aware of a circumstance which may prejudice a contract award during the tendering process should not affect the application of the 30-day limit if it can reasonably be judged to have been aware (which it clearly would have been in this case). Also there would not appear to have been any circumstances whereby the court would consider extending the time frame as there was nothing to prevent Mace from having issued proceedings earlier (ie no "good reason" beyond their control) other than the fact they may have feared this would prejudice their chances of winning the bid.
机译:肯定是在Turning Point诉Norfolk County Council一案中的判决(假设潜在索赔的依据与1月26日宣布的Mark Thurston任命有关),Mace现在已超过30天的时限,可以正式发布诉讼(Mace雇用3月14日在HS2行进行质量检查)。特别是,该案例指出,如果招标人可以合理地判断已经知道了招标的事实,那么招标人在招标过程中意识到可能会损害合同授予的情况这一事实不应影响30天期限的适用。在这种情况下显然是这样)。此外,似乎没有任何情况可以使法院考虑延长时限,因为除了他们可能担心的事实之外,没有什么可以阻止钉头锤提早提起诉讼的(即没有超出他们控制的“充分理由”)。这会损害他们中标的机会。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Building》 |2017年第12期|28-28|共1页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号