Suspension of ANPR framework agreement selection guide by CIPAL: requiring cloud hosting for all 10 references is disproportionate when only one market player has such experience — acting as central purchasing body for federal and regional authorities exceeds statutory powers of intermunicipal association
The Council of State suspended CIPAL's decision to launch an ANPR enforcement framework agreement (estimated at €220 million) because the selection criteria were disproportionate — cloud hosting was required for all 10 references while it was only a sub-element of the contract and only one market player (the incumbent) had such experience — and because CIPAL as an intermunicipal service association failed to demonstrate that acting as central purchasing body for federal, regional and other non-municipal entities fell within objectives of municipal interest.
What happened?
CIPAL, an intermunicipal service association with 268 members, launched a competitive procedure with negotiation for a €220M framework agreement for integrated ANPR enforcement solutions. Selection criteria required 10 unique references, all cloud-hosted, with non-cloud references capped at 25% score and a 60/100 minimum. Only one market player (the incumbent SMARTVILLE) had cloud-hosted ANPR experience. Two ANPR companies unable to meet cloud requirements challenged the selection guide before the submission deadline. The Council found the non-division into lots adequately justified but ruled the cloud hosting requirement disproportionate — cloud hosting was merely a sub-element, yet determined selection eligibility. The Council also found that CIPAL's planned scope as central purchasing body for federal ministries, regional agencies, port authorities and other non-municipal entities exceeded its statutory authority under the Local Government Decree, as CIPAL failed to demonstrate each entity served municipal interest objectives. Both grounds were serious and suspension was ordered.
Why does this matter?
This ruling limits proportionality of selection criteria for innovative procurements: requiring a specific technology for all references when it's only a sub-element is disproportionate if it effectively excludes all but the incumbent. It also clarifies that intermunicipal associations acting as central purchasing bodies must stay within their statutory municipal interest objectives.
The lesson
Selection criteria requiring specific technology for all references must be proportionate to the contract scope. Intermunicipal associations must demonstrate that each entity served through their central purchasing body role falls within municipal interest objectives.
Ask yourself
Are your selection criteria proportionate to the contract scope? As an intermunicipal association, can you demonstrate municipal interest for each entity served as central purchasing body?
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 →