Skip to content

Keyword: Exclusion

The search returned 14 results.

Exclusion of Certain Legal Services from Directive 2014/24/EU journal article

Annotation on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Fifth Chamber) of 6 June 2019 in Case C-264/18 P. M. and Others v Ministerraad

Marco Ceruti

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 14 (2019), Issue 3, Page 197 - 202

This paper explores the exclusion of certain legal services from Directive 2014/24/EU, in relation to the judgment of the CJEU in the P.M. e a. Case, stating that legal services provided by a lawyer are to be conceived only in the context of a relationship intuitu personae between the lawyers and their client, characterised by the utmost confidentiality and by the free choice of representative, at the same time leaving for national legislatures to determine whether those services should be subject to public procurement rules. Keywords: Public procurement; National legislation; Exclusion of certain legal services; Principles of equal treatment and subsidiarity.

Sanctionable Misconduct in the Procurement Legislation of Azerbaijan journal article

Teymour Aliyev

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 14 (2019), Issue 1, Page 55 - 62

The Republic of Azerbaijan, as a young member of the Council of Europe, which ratified and implemented to its legislation the provisions of numerous conventions against corruption as well as other international agreements on combating transnational crimes, money laundering and other corruption-related misconduct, and by being a developing country and benefiting from loans and other funds provided by the World Bank Group (WBG), should substantially upgrade its anti-corruption legislation and especially in the procurement area in order to keep pace with fast changing international standards. Whilst the concept of corruption may be more or less universal both in the national legislation and international normative documents, the notions of fraud and other ‘corruption-related’ misbehaviour in laws of Azerbaijan should be clearly defined and advanced to match the definitions used by the WBG and other multilateral development banks. And when they are legibly defined, the grounds for the exclusion and debarment of bidders and contractors committing such misconduct and sanctions should be broadened and differentiated with an eye to ensure fairness of the procurement process and harmonization with regulations applied internationally. In this work the terms of corruption, forgery, fraud and coercion according to the national legislation of Azerbaijan and the WBG standards have been analysed and compared. Further, in order to demonstrate legal shortages and loopholes at the national level, the legal grounds for the exclusion and debarment of bidders committing corruption-related acts at procurement procedures in Azerbaijan and its champion company SOCAR, and the type of applicable sanctions, with comparison to the provisions of the suspension and debarment standards employed by the WBG, have been described. Finally, the author has tried to offer proposals on the elimination of regulatory gaps for the purpose of ensuring the effectiveness and fairness of procurement-related exclusion and debarment process in Azerbaijan. Keywords: Corruption-related Misconduct; Sanctions; Exclusion; Debarment; World Bank Group; Procurement legislation.

Competition in the Competitor: Collusion in Public Procurement Procedures and Insurance Syndicates journal article

Annotation on the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Sixth Chamber) of 8 February 2018 in Case C-144/17 Lloyd’s of London v Agenzia Regionale per la Protezione dell’Ambiente della Calabria.

Giuseppe Bitti

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 14 (2019), Issue 2, Page 129 - 133

The Case deals with the exclusion from procurement procedures of tenderers which are part of the same association, due to possible collusions among them. The Court of Justice of the European Union was asked whether national legislation which foresees additional exclusion grounds, forbidding undertakings which are part of the same associative or corporate structure from participating in tendering procedures through a common proxy, complies with EU law. The Court clarified the issue, and confirmed that the general principles of equal treatment, transparency and non-discrimination allow national legislation to foresee further grounds for exclusion, in addition to those mentioned by Directive 2004/18. Such legislation shall nonetheless comply with and be interpreted according to the equally important principle of proportionality.

News


Current Issue

Issue 1 / 2024