Specialists International
This Knowledge Check concerns HM Courts and Tribunals Service's application to lift the automatic suspension preventing it from entering into a managed cyber-security services contract. The court considered whether damages would compensate Cyberfort Limited or HMCTS and where the least risk of injustice lay while the procurement challenge awaited trial.
Cyberfort had supplied HMCTS with cyber-security services since September 2020. It lost the 2025 procurement to Accenture and issued its claim on 16 February 2026, triggering the suspension under regulation 95 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Adrian Williamson KC, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court, heard HMCTS's application on 8 July 2026.
The court applied the American Cyanamid framework used in procurement cases, including the guidance in Camelot UK v The Gambling Commission and Neurim Pharmaceuticals v Generics UK. It held that damages would adequately compensate Cyberfort, would not adequately compensate HMCTS if the suspension continued, and that the balance of convenience favoured ending the suspension immediately.
- Cyberfort's incumbent contract and business evidence
- The American Cyanamid framework
- The evidential burden at the adequacy-of-damages stages
- Cyberfort's reference-contract argument
- The alleged reputational and workforce effects
- HMCTS's intended service improvements
- The public interest and the successful bidder
- The order lifting the suspension