In the direct award procedure a public body awards a contract directly to a supplier without tendering it first. It is the counterpart of the open procedure and the least formalised way of awarding. Because it restricts competition it is permitted only under certain conditions — and those conditions are interesting to suppliers in two opposite directions.
The two grounds for permissibility
A direct award can be permissible for two quite different reasons. The first is contract value: below certain thresholds a formal procedure would be disproportionate, so direct award is allowed. That is quantitatively the most common case and covers a large number of smaller contracts. The second ground is substantive: even above the thresholds, direct award is possible in exceptional cases set out in law. These exceptions are listed exhaustively and construed narrowly, because they depart from the principle of competition.
Typical exceptions
The situations provided for in law include, for example, cases where for technical or legal reasons only a single supplier can deliver, or where unforeseeable urgency rules out a formal procedure. Follow-on contracts also come into consideration where changing supplier would cause disproportionate disadvantage, as do cases where a preceding procedure produced no result. What matters is that the awarding body must be able to evidence such a ground — the mere convenience of a direct award is not enough.
Why this matters to suppliers in two directions
The first direction is opportunity. A substantial share of public procurement takes place below the thresholds and therefore potentially by direct award. Those contracts are not tendered and cannot be found by searching — access runs through being known to the awarding body, through existing references, and through being remembered as a capable supplier. For smaller and regional firms that is often the more realistic route to market than competing in large open procedures.
The other direction: a ground of appeal
The second direction concerns legal remedies. Where an awarding body makes a direct award for a contract that would have required a formal procedure, that is legally challengeable. The same applies to artificially splitting a project into several small contracts to get below the thresholds. A supplier deprived of a chance to participate can raise it. Whether such a step is sensible is always also a commercial question — it is rarely the start of a good relationship with an awarding body you want to keep working with.
Publication despite direct award
Depending on the situation, direct awards are also published, particularly where they occur above certain thresholds on the basis of an exception. Those publications are informative for suppliers: they show in which areas an awarding body awards directly and to whom. Following those patterns over time reveals where positioning yourself as a possible supplier makes sense — information that plain tender searches do not yield.
Practical consequence
A two-part strategy follows for suppliers. In the tendered space, systematics count: capture publications reliably, work through documents carefully, keep evidence ready. In the direct-award space, visibility counts: be known to the relevant awarding bodies, be able to show regional references, be reachable and reliable. The two routes complement each other, and a company pursuing only the first overlooks a substantial part of the market.