Corporacion America Airports (CAAP), a Luxembourg-American company, has filed a lawsuit before the Administrative Court of Montenegro against the Government’s Concessions Commission.
CAAP claims that the Tender Commission for the concession of Montenegro’s airports unlawfully altered the scoring criteria under external influence. The company argues that the first evaluation of technical offers was legal and should be considered the only valid assessment. On this basis, CAAP maintains that it should be ranked as the sole first bidder for the concession.
The lawsuit cites multiple reasons, including the opinion of a leading Brussels-based law firm with expertise in EU public procurement, which concluded that the second evaluation of offers undermined the legality of the tender. CAAP has also requested the court to suspend further steps in the concession process until a final ruling is issued.
The Concessions Commission had already rejected CAAP’s request to halt the tender, stating that the appeal was unfounded and that potential losses could be pursued through compensation claims. The commission argued that suspending the process would harm public interest by unnecessarily delaying the concession.
CAAP had previously filed a complaint after the July 17 ranking, where South Korea’s Incheon International Airport Corporation was placed first with 96.18 points, while CAAP was second with 65.15 points. Following the complaint, the commission partially accepted CAAP’s arguments and ordered the Tender Commission to correct deficiencies in the evaluation. This led to the possibility of a third technical evaluation, even though financial offers had already been opened.
CAAP argues that a third evaluation after the opening of financial bids violates tender rules, which require financial offers to remain unopened if the technical score is below 80 points. They insist that only the first evaluation, where CAAP ranked first, was legal and transparent, while the second and any further assessments are illegitimate.
According to CAAP, changes between the first and second evaluations altered the rules mid-process, leading to unequal treatment, lack of transparency, and legal uncertainty. They also allege undue influence from the Montenegrin government and its advisor IFC, which pressured the Tender Commission to re-score offers to avoid legal risks for Montenegro.
CAAP concludes that the unlawful second evaluation allowed Incheon to advance and be declared the top-ranked bidder instead of them. They demand that the court recognize the first evaluation as the only lawful basis for awarding the concession.
