Annulment of Royal Decree modifying maximum amounts for contractor recognition classes: 20% increase does not restore proportionality when construction costs have risen by factor 2.5 and staffing requirements remain unchanged
The Council of State annulled the Royal Decree of 14 April 2024 which raised the maximum contract amounts per contractor recognition class by 20%, as this increase failed to restore proportionality between the new maximum amounts and unchanged staffing requirements — while construction costs had risen by factor 2.5 since 1991 (ABEX index) and the dredging sector had become more capital-intensive and less labour-intensive.
What happened?
The Royal Decree of 14 April 2024 raised maximum contract amounts per recognition class by approximately 20% (class 7: from €5.33M to €6.4M). NV G., a class 7 dredging company with 19 blue-collar workers, challenged this arguing that the equality principle was violated: staffing requirements (83 workers for class 8) remained unchanged while construction costs had risen by factor 2.5 since 1991. Class 8 companies saw their exclusive operating scope follow real cost evolution, while class 7 companies were effectively degraded. The Public Procurement Commission itself flagged the 'incoherence' of raising amounts without adjusting linked criteria. Both a late intervention request by an industry association and a last-minute request to maintain the effects of the annulled regulation (art. 14ter) were rejected as disloyal procedural conduct. The Council annulled the decree, finding the proportionality between new maximum amounts and unchanged staffing requirements was not restored.
Why does this matter?
This ruling establishes that when adjusting maximum amounts per recognition class, the regulator must maintain proportionality with unchanged recognition criteria. A mere 20% increase when costs have risen by factor 2.5 violates the equality principle. For regulatory acts, the prospect of a more favourable regime after annulment suffices as interest.
The lesson
When raising maximum amounts per recognition class, ensure proportionality with existing staffing and technical requirements. Late procedural interventions and requests to maintain effects of annulled regulations will be rejected as disloyal conduct if no valid justification is provided for the delay.
Ask yourself
Is there still a proportional relationship between maximum contract amounts and staffing requirements in the recognition system? Have you timely filed any procedural requests?
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 →