The Ministry of Transport has published the updated ranking list of bidders in the concession process for Montenegro’s airports, showing the South Korean company Incheon International Airport Corporation (IIAC) as the top-ranked bidder.
As in the initial ranking prepared by the Tender Commission and officially released on 17 July, IIAC received 96.18 points, while the Luxembourg–American company Corporación América Airports (CAAP) ranked second with 65.15 points.
The Ministry announced that the list is being published after corrections were made to the evaluation report, following the decision of the Concessions Commission issued on 1 September. According to the Law on Concessions, bidders have 15 days from the publication of the ranking to file a complaint with the Concessions Commission. They also have the right to request access to the tender documentation within eight days.
Earlier in September, the Government’s Concessions Commission partially upheld CAAP’s complaint regarding the initial ranking for the concession of the Podgorica and Tivat airports, delaying the final decision on whether and when Montenegro’s airports will be granted under long-term lease. The ranking list was returned to the Tender Commission for corrections related to identified irregularities in the explanation of scoring and evaluation.
The Concessions Commission previously ruled that the initial explanation of the ranking did not provide sufficiently clear and valid reasons for the scoring of individual criteria, which is necessary to ensure transparency, equal treatment, and legal compliance.
CAAP had earlier submitted a formal complaint within the prescribed deadline, expressing dissatisfaction with the initial ranking. The company requested access to the complete tender documentation and an explanation of the re-evaluation process, arguing that the revised scoring significantly altered previous results and prevented their offer from being ranked first.
In its submission, CAAP stated that there were concerns regarding transparency and consistency in applying the criteria, and called for a review of the legality of the procedure. On 19 September, the company filed a lawsuit with the Administrative Court.
According to the information obtained by the newspaper, CAAP’s lawsuit asks the court to declare unlawful the actions of the Tender Commission through which, as they claim, the scoring criteria were altered under the influence of individuals who were not members of the commission. CAAP is seeking recognition that only the initial technical evaluation conducted by the Tender Commission is valid, and that CAAP should be the sole top-ranked bidder.
The lawsuit reportedly includes multiple legal arguments, including the opinion of a leading Brussels-based law firm specializing in EU public procurement, which concluded that the Tender Commission’s handling of the second technical evaluation undermined the legality of the process.
CAAP has also requested that the court suspend all further activities related to the tender until a decision is issued. The company previously asked for postponement of the final government decision pending the outcome of the Administrative Court procedure.
The Government’s Concessions Commission rejected CAAP’s request to halt the tender, stating that the request was unfounded and lacked legal basis, noting that the contested decision did not have an enforceable character. The Commission also determined that CAAP did not demonstrate the existence of irreparable harm, pointing out that any potential financial loss could be claimed as damages, and that the decision did not affect CAAP’s reputation or their right to continue participating in the process.
It further emphasized that delaying the process would be against public interest, as it would unnecessarily prolong the tender and jeopardize legal certainty. The Commission noted that CAAP may ask the Administrative Court to order a suspension of execution, provided legal conditions are met.
According to earlier information obtained by the newspaper, CAAP had on 12 September requested that the Concessions Commission immediately suspend the implementation of its 1 September decision and freeze the process until the Administrative Court reaches a ruling.
