A construction company has initiated a lawsuit against the National Infrastructure Development Company Ltd (NIDCO) over its rejected bid for the proposed flyover at the Churchill-Roosevelt Highway, Curepe.
Lutchmeesingh’s Transport Contractors Ltd filed the lawsuit in April last year, two months after it was informed that its tender for the project would not be considered by NIDCO.
The case came up for hearing in the Port-of-Spain High Court on Tuesday, with presiding Judge Vasheist Kokaram setting a timetable for determining a preliminary issues in the case.
According to the company’s statement of case, its attorneys are claiming their client “suffered loss and damage namely to the extent that it has been deprived of the opportunity to protest and, in due course, change the outcome of the tender evaluation procedure contemplated by the Invitation to Tender (ITT).
The company is seeking damages for the wasted expenditure incurred participating in the tender process which it claims was rendered pointless by the Nidco’s breaches of contract for the lost opportunity to obtain a profit-making contract.
According to the company’s statement of case, Nidco issued the tender on October 28, 2014, in which it set the conditions for the selection of the contractor for the project, which is estimated to cost over $400 million.
The two main considerations cited by NIDCO in the selection process were costs for construction and the capability of potential construction firms to complete the mega-project.
After engaging in negotiations over several meetings with NIDCO officials, the company was informed on February 6 last year, that it could no longer be part of the tendering process.
“The defendant (NIDCO) has, despite repeated requests, refused to provide detailed or sufficient (or indeed any) reasons for the purported decision to reject or not proceed with the tender,” the company’s lawyers stated in their statement of case as they also noted that NIDCO had promised to justify their decisions to companies involved in the tendering process.
The company is also claiming that if it had been informed of NIDCO’s reasons, it could have amended the tender to be move competitive.
The tendering process was also marred in controversy as there was a war of words between former junior minister in the Ministry of Works and Infrastructure Stacy Roopnarine and her former boss Dr Suruj Rambachan over NIDCO’s handling of the tender process.
Despite reports in June last year, that the project was jointly awarded to two companies, among them Luchmeesingh’s, no contract has been agreed. To succeed in their claim the company must first prove that the ITT issued by NIDCO was a binding contract which it was bound. Kokaram will give his ruling on this preliminary issue on June 3.
The company is being represented by Simon Hughes, QC, Jessica Harragin and Dereck Balliram while Kelvin Ramkisson is representing NIDCO.