P.R. Laws tit. 27, § 2619
(a) Right to review.— Only such persons that have requested to be evaluated in a procedure of request for qualifications and that have submitted the necessary documents to be evaluated, as per the requirements established by the Authority or by the Partnership Committee, and that have not been qualified, shall be entitled to request a judicial review of such determination. Persons that have not submitted the documents required by the Authority or the Partnership Committee in the course of the qualification procedures, shall be automatically disqualified and may not request a judicial review of the final qualification determination made by the Partnership Committee.
Likewise, only such proponents that have been qualified to participate in the procedure for selection of proposals, who have submitted to the Partnership Committee complete proposals and all documents required under the procedures established for proposal evaluation, but who have not been selected for the award of a partnership contract, may request a judicial review of the approval of a partnership contract by the Governor or the person onto whom he/she delegates.
Such review may be requested after:
(1) The determination not to qualify the proponent by the Partnership Committee, pursuant to the requirements established in this subsection, to participate in the procedures for the establishment of a partnership, or
(2) the final determination to execute the partnership contract with another proponent, which determination to execute the contract shall be final after having completed the approval procedures as provided for in clauses (2)-(5) of § 2608(g) of this title.
These requests for review must comply with the procedure established in this section, which shall preempt any other jurisdictional or competence criterion or procedure that would otherwise apply pursuant to other applicable laws and regulations.
(b) Request for judicial review.— Non-qualified petitioners or non-selected proponents shall have a jurisdictional term of twenty (20) days-counted as of the date of the sending by certified mail of the notice of the Partnership Committee or the Authority, as the case may be, of the final determination-to file a writ for administrative review with the Court of Appeals by a recourse in aid of jurisdiction to said court. An interlocutory resolution by the Partnership Committee or the Authority shall not be reviewable; it may only be reviewed concurrently with the final determination. If the date of notice by the Partnership Committee or the Authority is different from the date of mailing such notice, the term shall be counted as of the date of mailing. The reconsideration mechanism shall not apply before the Partnership Committee or the Authority.
The writ of review shall be issued discretionally by the Court of Appeals. Such court shall issue a statement on the writ requested within a term of ten (10) days as of the date of filing the resource. The decision of the court may be to accept the recourse and shall issue a resolution indicating that it shall issue the writ requested, or it may deny it outrightly, in which case, the court may issue a resolution not stating the grounds. If the Court of Appeals does not issue a statement within ten (10) days following the filing of the recourse or denies the issue of the writ, a jurisdictional term of twenty (20) day shall begin to lapse for resorting to the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, by writ of certiorari. In the first case, the term shall begin to lapse on the day following the tenth day after having filed the recourse with the Court of Appeals; however, if the Court of Appeals issues a statement on the recourse, the term shall begin to lapse as of the date of filing in the court’s records a copy of the notice on the resolution, order or sentence, as the case may be.
If the Court of Appeals accepts the recourse, it shall issue a final determination within thirty (30) days of having accepted the same. Otherwise, the Court of Appeals shall lose jurisdiction and the twenty (20)-day term for resorting to the Supreme Court shall begin to lapse on the day following such thirty (30)-day term.
The review recourse filed with the Court of Appeals and the writ of certiorari filed with the Supreme Court shall be deemed to be the allegation of the petitioner, unless the reviewing Court provides otherwise. In the event that the Court of Appeals issue the writ of review, the party adversely affected by the determination of said court may resort to the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari within the jurisdictional term of twenty (20) days as of the date of filing in the court’s records the final determination of the Court of Appeals.
(c) Notice.— The petitioner before the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico shall give notice, with a copy of the writ, to the Authority, the partnering government entity, the selected proponent (in the event the award of the partnership contract is challenged), the proponents not selected (in the event the award of the partnership contract is challenged), the Persons that were qualified (in the event the qualification by the Partnership Committee is challenged), within the twenty (20)-day term established in subsection (b) of this section; Provided, That compliance of such notice shall be a requirement of a jurisdictional nature. All notices under this subsection shall be made by certified mail. Provided, That if the date of notice to the Authority and all other parties is different from the date of mailing of such notices, the term shall be computed from the date of mailing. The Authority and any other party interested may, within ten (10) days of having been notified of the writ of review or certiorari, or within the additional term that the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court may grant, file its opposition to the issue of the writ.
(d) Effect of the [issuance] of the writ of administrative review or the writ of certiorari.— The issue by the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court of a writ of administrative review or a writ of certiorari shall not stay the procedures for the qualification of petitioners, or for the evaluation or selection of proposals or negotiation of the partnership contract by the Partnership Committee with the proponent or proponents not disqualified, nor shall such issue stay the procedures for the authorization by the Boards of Directors, by the Secretary or the head of the partnering government entity and by the Governor or the executive official onto whom he/she delegates. Neither shall the same stay the execution and effectiveness of the partnership contract or its terms and conditions, unless the court with jurisdiction so orders expressly. The court may only stay the execution and effectiveness of the contract when the petitioner of the stay is able to demonstrate that such petitioner shall sustain irreparable damages if such recourse is not stayed; that such stay order is indispensable to protect the jurisdiction of the court; that such petitioner is highly likely to prevail on the grounds of merits; that the stay order shall not bring substantial damages to the other parties; that such order shall not harm the public interest; that there is no reasonable alternative to prevent the alleged damages; and that such damages cannot be compensated by granting a monetary remedy or any other proper remedy under the law. As a requirement for the issue of a stay order, the court with jurisdiction shall request that the petitioner post a bond or letter of credit sufficient to respond for all damages caused as a consequence of such stay order, the amount of which shall be not lesser than five percent (5%) of the proposed project’s worth as determined by the Partnership Committee and as specified in the request for proposals. Neither the mere loss of income due to the assumption of the risk of participating as a petitioner or proponent nor the mere loss of income or money due to the fact that one has not been the selected proponent shall constitute “irreparable damages”.
(e) Scope of the judicial review.— The qualification determinations of the Partnership Committee and the approval of the partnership contract by the Governor or the official onto whom he/she delegates, as provided under clauses (2)-(5) of § 2608(g) of this title, shall be revoked only if there is a manifest mistake, fraud or arbitrariness.
(f) Payment of fees.— The party defeated after proceedings for judicial review under subsection (b) of this section shall defray the expenses incurred by the other parties involved in such proceedings, and the amount of these expenses may be deducted, compensated or withdrawn from any letter of credit or bond posted in connection with the judicial review proceedings.
(g) Limitation of damages.— The petitioning party may not, under any circumstance, as part of its remedies, claim the right to be redressed for indirect, special or foreseeable damages, including profits not made.
(h) Exclusivity of the recourse.— No lawsuit, action, proceeding or recourse of any kind shall be admissible in any court other than those set forth in this section, except for such proceedings for eminent domain that the Authority or the Commonwealth may exercise pursuant to the authority conferred under this chapter. Any judicial review made with respect to the determination regarding the qualification of the proponent made by the Partnership Committee, or the approval of a partnership contract by the Governor or the executive official on whom he/she delegates, shall be conducted by following the procedures provided for in this section, and the Authority shall act as a representative of all of the abovementioned parties that participate in the procedures for the approval of a partnership contract pursuant to this chapter. No proceedings may be instituted for the petition of concurrent or further judicial reviews other than through the Authority and following the provisions of this section.
History —June 8, 2009, No. 29, § 20.