Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

193. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of judicial review cases not taken due to the practice by Departments to seek security for costs, thus preventing a judicial review of possible unfair and-or unlawful public procurement procedures; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3464/18]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am informed that, aside from the Student Transport v. Department of Education case (2011/1043/JR) (see the response to Question No. 198 for a list of ongoing and concluded procurement cases against Departments over the past five years), the Office of Government Procurement (OGP) is not aware of any other cases against Departments where an order for security for costs was made.

As a Department would only have the opportunity to seek security for costs when a case is brought, it would not be possible to have information relating to cases which were not brought due to a possible concern on the part of a potential applicant regarding the court’s jurisdiction to make an order for security for costs. In any event, I am informed that a security for costs order does not prevent the hearing of the judicial review application by the High Court. Furthermore, the OGP does not have a practice of seeking security for costs in public procurement matters.