Second Place Bidder States Cause Of Action For Intentional Interference With Prospective Economic Advantage.
by
Two companies sued defendant for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, alleging defendant submitted lowest bids by paying workers less than the statutorily required prevailing wage as required by Labor Code sections 1770 and 1771. During a three-year period, defendant outbid plaintiffs on 23 public works projects totaling more than $14.6 million. Citing Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1134, [131 Cal.Rptr.2d 29, 63 P.3d 937], the Court of Appeal stated: “As Korea Supply suggests, a bidder on a government contract who submits a superior bid and loses out only because a competitor manipulated the bid selection process through illegal conduct has been the victim of actionable intentional interference.” The appellate court concluded: “[I]f the plaintiff alleges it was the second lowest bidder and therefore, would have otherwise been awarded the contract, because that fact gives rise to a relationship with the public agency that made plaintiff’s award of the contract reasonably probable.” (Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. v. American Asphalt South, Inc. (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 8; February 20, 2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 748, [184 Cal.Rptr.3d 279].)
