Jurisprudential Analysis of Supreme Court rulings on compensation for damages derived from public bidding

Abstract

In recent years, the Superior Courts of Justice have accepted lawsuits regarding compensation as a result of damages offered by affected bidders in public bidding processes. This creates a relevant change in the previous jurisprudence of our courts, as they were reluctant to compensate for damages, maintaining that participation in a bidding process was a mere expectation. A relevant factor in this change is the declarations of illegality and arbitrariness in conjunction with the measure to reestablish the rule of law issued by the Court of Public Procurement together with the acceptance of the notion of loss of chance. Therefore, we will proceed to analyze the creation and operation of this specialized Judiciary and what is understood by an illegal and arbitrary act. Afterwards, we will refer to the concept of mere expectations, which is the notion of State Responsibility used by the Supreme Court, by identifying the criteria used to accept these actions and what is compensated through the analysis of sentences.