This article reviews the unsuccessful challenge by a disappointed bidder at first instance, and on appeal, in the Scottish courts in the case of Stannifer Developments Ltd v. Glasgow Development Agency, 1 which arose out of the sale by competitive tender of publicly owned land in Glasgow. The scope of judicial review in Scotland is discussed and compared with judicial review in England, with emphasis on judicial review as an appropriate means of challenging the contractor selection and contract award processes. In the author’s opinion, fairness is an essential element of this process but the Scottish court denied the existence of such a general rule. Some aspects of the decision in Stannifer are criticised. The author speculates as to how Stannifer might have sought a private law, as opposed to public law, remedy, and concludes with some recommendations made for the better conduct of the bidding process.

This case arose out of the sale by tender of a 1.9 hectares development site close to St Enoch’s Square, Glasgow. On 6 December 1996 chartered surveyors, on instructions from Glasgow Development Agency (GDA),2 issued an invitation to tender and set out information about the site and the terms on which it was offered for sale. Under the heading of “Sale Terms” it was stated that, in addition to price, any offer must contain a number of elements, and that suspensive conditions in regard to certain matters including planning in principle would be acceptable. It was also stated that

---

647