Court Rejects Via Nova Bid, Upholds Shapir's Win in Road 6 Tender
Translated & summarized from Calcalist by baba
The Jerusalem District Court rejected a petition by the Via Nova consortium, upholding Shapir's winning bid for the northern extension of Highway 6. The court ruled Via Nova's bid was disqualified correctly and the petition was filed too late. Via Nova plans to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Court rejected Via Nova's petition, confirming Shapir's win in the Highway 6 North tender.
- Judge Ilan Se la cited disqualification validity and significant delay in dismissing the case.
- Via Nova's bid was disqualified for failing to meet scoring thresholds and financial model issues.
- The consortium claimed its bid offered NIS 683 million more in concession fees.
- Via Nova must pay NIS 150,000 in legal costs and intends to appeal.
The Jerusalem District Court on Sunday dismissed a petition by the Via Nova consortium seeking to overturn Shapir's winning bid for the northern extension of Highway 6. Judge Ilan Se la ruled that the tender committee acted appropriately according to tender terms when it disqualified Via Nova's offer. The court rejected the petition both on its merits and due to significant delay in its filing.
Via Nova, a group comprising Manarav, Milgam, and France's Egis, filed its petition in October after its bid failed to meet the required scoring threshold. The consortium argued its offer would have generated approximately NIS 2.019 billion in concession fees for the state, compared to Shapir's NIS 1.336 billion, a difference of about NIS 683 million in favor of public funds. Despite this, the tender committee awarded Via Nova only 48.03 points, below the 60-point minimum needed to advance to the price proposal stage.
The dispute centered on Via Nova's revenue forecast of NIS 20.94 billion, versus the state's forecast of NIS 12.05 billion, a 74% disparity. The court found that tender documents stipulated a clear mechanism for evaluating revenues based on a safety net plus 15%. When Via Nova's forecast was adjusted to this mechanism, its financial model collapsed, partly due to a decrease in the senior debt coverage ratio and a negative return on equity.
Judge Se la also dismissed claims of flaws in forecast examination and the right to be heard, emphasizing that courts should not substitute their judgment for that of the tender committee. He further cited the petition's delay; Via Nova knew of its disqualification in July but waited until October to file, after Shapir signed the concession agreement in September.
Via Nova was ordered to pay NIS 150,000 in legal costs, split between the state and Shapir and its subsidiary Chotza Tzafon. Via Nova stated it accepted the court's decision and is reviewing its details, with plans to appeal to the Supreme Court.