I've read most of it. It is extremely boring! But what it seems to come down to is that Medpro didn't really understand what was required to fulfil the contract specification. And then tried to blame the NHS for not explaining it better. The judge told them to take a hike, because MedPro had held themselves out to be a very experienced company with great expertise. Bascially, it was their own fault.
' Medpro’s submission that it was wholly reliant upon DHSC for advice is, on the facts, utterly unrealistic. Medpro was presenting itself to DHSC as a worthy entrant into the fast lane for approval as a supplier and aiming to land contracts worth hundreds of millions of pounds of public money. It said repeatedly that it had experience. It claimed to be well established: Mr Barrowman’s years of experience were trumpeted, as was its track record “manufacturing large quantities for the Australian government” as well as Mr Page’s “We are certain that we are 100% compliant”. '