London mayor Sadiq Khan accuses Palantir of bypassing procurement rules

LONDON — Lawyers working on behalf of Mayor of London Sadiq Khan have accused the capital’s police force of breaching procurement rules by working with Palantir to award the U.S. tech giant a closely watched police contract. The case follows concerns expressed by multiple parliamentary committees about the U.K.’s dependence on foreign technology firms such as Palantir, which was co-founded in 2003 by Alex Karp and Peter Thiel. The tech firm brought a claim against the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime in the High Court in June after Khan’s deputy mayor refused to sign off on a £50 million contract with the Metropolitan Police for the provision of an AI and data analysis service. Palantir claims that Khan’s office blocked the contract unlawfully and “irrationally,” citing comments attributed to the mayor’s spokesperson which referred to the company’s unspecified “values and ethics.” Louis Mosley, Palantir’s U.K. CEO, has argued that Khan’s decision puts politics above Londoners’ safety, while Met Police Commissioner Mark Rowley has said that the force’s inability to access Palantir’s technology would worsen the impact of cuts to the force’s budget. In a pre-trial defense statement filed last Thursday and seen by POLITICO, lawyers for MOPAC said Palantir’s claim is “without merit and should be dismissed,” stating that the Met Police “conducted an award process that was unlawful.” It says the Met Police and Palantir designed a pilot of the technology in 2025 so that the value remained below a £500,000 threshold at which it would have required MOPAC approval. MOPAC, led by Khan’s deputy mayor for policing and crime, oversees the Met Police. Prior to the conclusion of that pilot in April 2026, the Met Police and Palantir started discussions on directly awarding Palantir a much larger contract to extend the pilot, according to the statement. The Met Police intended “at each stage” to award the larger contract to Palantir, the statement says, adding that the approach that was “supported/encouraged/assisted” by the company. Khan’s lawyers argue that this reflects a deliberate “Palantir strategy,” whereby the company enters into low-cost public contracts, often badged as pilots, “with the intention, objective and/or effect of avoiding the requirements of effective, transparent competition and/or procurement law,” before “influencing” the public authority into awarding further contracts “without conducting an effective, transparent competition and/or complying with procurement law.” The statement also says the Met Police intentionally avoided obtaining approval of its procurement strategy from MOPAC and repeatedly provided MOPAC with “misleading and/or inconsistent” information to give the impression that firms other than Palantir were in contention. These factors meant officials were unable to advise Khan’s deputy that the contract represented value for money, the statement says. A Palantir spokesperson called the defense statement “false” and said it ignored both the results of the pilot and government outsourcing guidance. The Met declined to comment on the ongoing legal case. It is not named as a party in the claim, but confirmed that it has submitted a response to the case. The case is expected to go to trial in January 2027. MOPAC has said it will work with the Met Police to design a competitive tender for the sought-after AI and data capabilities, which Palantir will be allowed to bid for. The Met Police has meanwhile extended the earlier pilot, which uses Palantir’s software to identify wrongdoing inside the force.