On 27 January 2011, the High Court granted an application by the Department for International Development (DIFID) to remove the suspension of an award of a contract for landmine clearance in Cambodia. The conclusion of the contract was suspended as a result of a claim by one of the bidders for the contract, The Halo Trust. In essence, The Halo Trust appealed against (i) the inclusion of award criteria and sub-criteria concerning development benefits, which in their view was not sufficiently linked to the main object of the contract; (ii) that there had been an increase in budget during the course of the tender and (iii) there was a lack of consultation with the Cambodian government on its de-mining policy. DIFID took interim action before the High Court requesting removal of the suspension of the award pending the outcome of the appeal. The High Court concluded that the balance of convenience favoured permitting the conclusion of the contract to the successful bidder. In doing so, it took into account the relative weakness of the complaint, the public interest in allowing the contract to proceed and the fact that DIFID had used a competitive process rather than simply continuing grant funding.