Offered hundreds of millions more - and was disqualified: The mechanism that decided the Highway 6 North tender
The Jerusalem District Court rejected the petition of the Manrav Group against the win of Shapir in the Highway 6 North tender. Manrav presented a revenue forecast 74% higher than the state's, but a predetermined adjustment mechanism in the tender led to the failure of its financial model. Manrav's price offer was not officially opened.
The Jerusalem District Court rejected the petition of the Manrav Group against the win of Shapir Civil and Marine Engineering in the mega-tender for the construction, financing, planning, operation and maintenance of sections 8 and 9 of Highway 6 North. Manrav presented a revenue forecast of approximately NIS 20.94 billion, 74% higher than the state's forecast of approximately NIS 12.05 billion. A predetermined mechanism in the tender stipulated that when a bidder's revenue forecast exceeds the state's forecast by more than 15%, the financial model is examined based on the state's forecast plus only 15%. As a result, Manrav's model did not meet the threshold conditions: the debt coverage ratio dropped to 1.04 (minimum 1.01), the return on equity became negative, and the model scored 48.03 points, below the 60-point threshold. Manrav's price offer was approximately NIS 2.019 billion compared to Shapir's approximately NIS 1.336 billion, but Manrav's offer was not officially opened in the final stage. The court ruled that the tender committee acted according to the rules, and that the delay in filing the petition (from July 16 to October 14, 2026) worked against Manrav. Manrav was ordered to pay court costs of NIS 150,000.