"In his ruling, Mr Justice Chamberlain said: "There is now no dispute that, in a substantial number of cases, the secretary of state breached his legal obligation to publish contract award notices within 30 days of the award of contracts.
"There is also no dispute that the secretary of state failed to publish redacted contracts in accordance with the transparency policy.""
It hasn't actually said that there was anything improper about the awarding of the contracts, just that the information about them which should have been made public was not published within the correct period (or indeed anywhere near it, sounded like there could have been a bit of tolerance of near misses in unprecedented circumstances)
There will need to be further investigation (and maybe further legal actionn) to establish if there was waste or cronyism. Right now all that has been established is breach of requirement to publish