Suspension in extreme urgency: non-selection of LIXON based solely on RC insurance is insufficiently motivated — the criterion 'professional risk insurance' potentially covers all professional insurance policies
The suspension of the award decision for lot 1 of the energy renovation of 201 social housing units to the joint venture BEMAT-MOURY is ordered in extreme urgency — the contracting authority reduced the selection criterion 'professional risk insurance' to RC insurance alone (5 million euros), while LIXON had produced four insurance certificates covering over 180 million euros.
What happened?
The Immobilière Sociale entre Sambre et Haine launched an open procedure for works involving the energy renovation of 201 social housing units. The specifications required, as a selection criterion, proof of 'professional risk insurance' with indication of insured amounts, with a minimum guarantee per claim reaching the contract amount. LIXON submitted four insurance certificates (RC, all-risk construction, workplace accidents, decennial liability) totaling over 180 million euros. The contracting authority excluded LIXON because its RC coverage was only 5 million euros against an offer of 11.1 million. The Council of State found that the notion of 'professional risk insurance' is undefined in the law, the royal decree, or the specifications, and in its ordinary meaning covers all professional insurance contracts. The motivation was insufficient. Suspension was ordered.
Why does this matter?
This ruling clarifies that 'professional risk insurance' as a selection criterion, when undefined, must be interpreted broadly and cannot be reduced to RC insurance alone. The transparency principle requires selection criteria to be sufficiently clear and unambiguous.
The lesson
As contracting authority: precisely define what you mean by 'professional risk insurance' — which types, which minimum amounts, individually or cumulatively. As tenderer: submit all relevant insurance certificates when the criterion is broadly formulated.
Ask yourself
As contracting authority, did I precisely define which insurance types I require? Is the criterion consistent between specifications and contract notice? Did I clarify whether the minimum guarantee applies per policy or cumulatively?
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 →