Transparency and a RWIND (reasonably well-informed and normally diligent) tenderer.
The issue is not what the invitation to tender meant but whether its meaning would be clear to any RWIND tenderer, and is suitable for objective determination. The Court should approach such cases by placing itself in the position of the reasonably informed tenderer, looking at the matter objectively, not through hearing evidence of what such a hypothetical tenderer might think. The question of what a reasonably well-informed and normally diligent tenderer might anticipate requires an objective answer. Evidence as to what the tenderers themselves thought the criteria required is, essentially, irrelevant.