The High Court has lifted a suspension on a contract for a €500 million scheme aimed at building social and affordable homes over the next four years in six council areas.
Mr Justice Denis McDonald lifted the automatic suspension on the awarding of a contract following the initiation of legal proceedings by one of the unsuccessful bidders.
Coolsivna Construction Ltd has brought the challenge against Meath County Council, which is the lead local authority for a framework agreement for awarding building contracts for councils in Meath, Longford, Louth, Westmeath, Monaghan and Cavan.
Some 520 homes are almost ready to go under the scheme, while work on 126 homes in two schemes in Co Meath can begin immediately or very soon.
Once the challenge was brought, under EU procurement law, an automatic stay on the contract came into force until the proceedings were dealt with. That is unless an application is brought to lift the stay.
Meath County Council brought a lift application which was opposed by Coolsivna.
On Friday, Mr Justice McDonald said that, among other reasons, the public interest in addressing the needs of the homeless required that the stay be lifted.
This included the fact that two projects – one for 47 homes in Athboy and 79 in Ashbourne – are at 'ready to go' stage and the building on these units will have a major effect on the house waiting lists in both those local areas. Other projects in Louth and Monaghan were also at an advanced stage, he said.
If the stay was not lifted, this could add an eight or nine month delay to the construction projects, he said.
The judge agreed to postpone the lifting of the stay until Tuesday to allow lawyers for Coolsivna to apply to the Court of Appeal for permission to bring an appeal against his decision.
In its proceedings, which were admitted to the Commercial Court last month, Coolsivna claims Meath Co Council's decision to appoint six other parties to the framework agreement was unlawful and invalid.
It claims the council, among other things, failed to provide any or adequate reasons for its decision, failed to advise on the characteristics and relative advantages of the lowest scoring successful tenderer and a failure to correctly apply the award criteria.
It seeks that the awarding of the contract be set aside and that Coolsivna be appointed as a member of a framework agreement under which successful tenderers are appointed. It also seeks an order that the council commence a new process.
The council views the complaints by Coolsivna to be without substance and that it should not be granted any of the relief it seeks.
