Utah Court of Appeals
Must Utah procurement appeals include all required documents from the start? ICS Corrections v. Procurement Policy Board Explained
Summary
ICS Corrections sought review of the Utah Procurement Policy Board’s dismissal of CenturyLink’s appeal of a procurement decision. The Board dismissed the appeal because CenturyLink failed to attach a copy of the protest decision to its initial appeal filing, even though it provided the copy one business day later.
Practice Areas & Topics
Analysis
The Utah Court of Appeals recently clarified that strict compliance is required when filing appeals under Utah’s procurement statutes, rejecting arguments for substantial compliance in administrative proceedings.
Background and Facts
In 2019, Utah solicited bids for inmate telephone services. CenturyLink protested the Division of Purchasing’s decision to award the contract to Global Tel*Link Corporation. When the Division rejected CenturyLink’s protest, CenturyLink appealed to the Utah Procurement Policy Board. However, CenturyLink failed to attach a copy of the protest decision to its appeal, providing it one business day later. The Board dismissed the appeal for this omission.
Key Legal Issues
The primary issue was whether Utah Code section 63G-6a-1702(2)(b), which requires that appeals “shall . . . be accompanied by a copy of any written protest decision,” mandates strict compliance or allows for substantial compliance when documents are provided shortly after filing.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The court examined the statutory language and legislative intent. Section 63G-6a-1702(5)(b) directs the appointing officer to “dismiss any claim asserted in the appeal, or dismiss the appeal” if it “fails to comply with any of the requirements.” This unequivocal language demonstrated legislative intent to make the requirements mandatory, not directory. The court distinguished cases allowing substantial compliance, noting those apply only to directory provisions.
Practice Implications
This decision reinforces that Utah’s procurement appeal statutes require exactness in compliance. Practitioners must ensure all required documents accompany the initial filing. The court emphasized that “once [a] statute is determined to require strict compliance, all bets are off for any actions other than exactness.” Even minimal delays in providing required documentation will result in mandatory dismissal under these statutes.
Case Details
Case Name
ICS Corrections v. Procurement Policy Board
Citation
2020 UT App 159
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20191006-CA
Date Decided
November 19, 2020
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
Utah Code section 63G-6a-1702(2)(b) requiring that a notice of appeal be accompanied by a copy of any written protest decision is mandatory and requires strict compliance.
Standard of Review
Arbitrary and capricious or clearly erroneous
Practice Tip
When filing administrative appeals under Utah’s procurement statutes, ensure all required documents are attached to the initial filing to avoid mandatory dismissal.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.