The proceedings concerned a tendering process carried out by the respondent Common Services Agency in 2010 in respect of the provision of medical services to health authorities in Scotland. The appellant submitted that, among other things, the court below had erred in treating the reasonably well-informed and diligent tenderer (the RWIND tenderer) as a hypothetical construct, and in applying the RWIND tenderer standard according to the court's assessment of what a hypothetical RWIND tenderer would have done or thought. The Supreme Court, in dismissing the claim, held that the question could not be determined by evidence, as it depended on the application of a legal test rather than being a purely empirical enquiry.