High Court rules Cambridgeshire County Council's CQC rating condition in £928m homecare framework procurement is contested under the Procurement Act 2023
Mrs Justice Jefford handed down judgment on 3 November 2026 in Verity Healthcare Limited v Cambridgeshire County Council ([2026] EWHC 2830 (TCC)), a procurement challenge with significant implications for public sector contracting under the Procurement Act 2023. Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC) is running a competitive flexible procedure to award a Homecare Framework for the provision of regulated homecare services to adults across Cambridgeshire, with a contract term of up to 10 years. The estimated total value of the framework is £928,080,000 (including VAT). Verity Healthcare, a regulated health and social care provider, challenged a condition of participation requiring bidders to hold a Care Quality Commission (CQC) rating of 'Good' or above. Verity is registered with the CQC but does not hold that rating. Its case, brought under section 22 of the Procurement Act 2023, is that the CQC Rating Condition is not proportionate and therefore unlawful. Verity sought urgent interim relief without notice when it issued its claim in August 2026, though issues around full and frank disclosure arose in that context. CCC responded by applying to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgment, arguing it was not commenced within the statutory time limit set by section 106 of the Procurement Act 2023. The judgment addresses both Verity's application for interim relief and CCC's strike-out application. The case is conducted in the Technology and Construction Court with Richard Clayton KC (instructed by Farani Taylor Solicitors) for Verity and Stephen Kosmin (instructed by Sharpe Pritchard LLP) for CCC.
Why this matters
This is one of the first contested procurement challenges to reach the Technology and Construction Court under the Procurement Act 2023, which came into force in February 2025 and replaced the EU-era procurement regime. The case tests how courts will interpret the proportionality requirement for conditions of participation in section 22, a provision with no direct equivalent in the previous regime. The CQC Rating Condition is not unusual in healthcare procurement, so the court's approach here will be closely watched by local authorities and NHS bodies structuring similar tenders. The limitation point under section 106 is equally significant: if the court upholds the strict time bar, it will confirm that challengers must move very fast after a procurement decision, reinforcing a pattern seen in earlier cases under the new Act.
On the Ground
The case activates public procurement law, judicial review of public contracting decisions, and interim injunction practice. Local authorities, NHS bodies, and framework operators procuring regulated services will need procurement counsel to review their conditions of participation for proportionality under section 22. Healthcare suppliers bidding for framework agreements need advice on when time starts running for a challenge under section 106 and how to preserve interim relief options. Farani Taylor Solicitors act for Verity and Sharpe Pritchard LLP for Cambridgeshire County Council. A trainee on this matter would prepare and paginate the trial bundle, compile the chronology of procurement events, assist with the disclosure review of procurement documents, and research the limitation provisions under section 106 of the Procurement Act 2023.
Interview prep
Question you might get
“What does this case tell us about the key litigation risks for contracting authorities setting conditions of participation under the Procurement Act 2023?”
Sign up free to see the full answer
A model answer you can lift into an interview — how to frame this story for a partner.
Sign up freeMy notes
saved