Marc Pauka

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 18 (2023), Issue 3, Page 230 - 233

Sarah Schoenmaekers

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 17 (2022), Issue 2, Page 71 - 80

In the European Union, the award of public contracts by contracting authorities has to comply with the principles of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular the free movement of goods, freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services, as well as the principles deriving therefrom, such as equal treatment, non-discrimination, mutual recognition, proportionality and transparency. In principle, all procurement procedures start with a contract notice which is used as a means of calling for competition in respect of all procedures. By informing all economic operators about the possible business opportunities, European public procurement rules seek to promote competition and aim to open up the procurement market to undertakings beyond national borders. This is expected to lead to lower prices and more choice. Contract notices include information on the language(s) in which tenders or requests to participate must be drawn up which entails that economic operators are bound to draw up their tender proposal in the language(s) chosen by the contracting authority. It is not hard to imagine that this may seriously hinder free movement and restrict competition in the internal market. This contribution will focus on the use of languages in public procurement procedures and reflect on whether Directive 2014/24/EU, which finds it legal basis in the Articles 53(1) TFEU on freedom of establishment, 62 TFEU (free provision of services) and 114 TFEU (approximation of provisions relating to the establishment and functioning of the internal market) is not in itself hindering free movement by its regulation on languages. Keywords: language; non-tariff barrier; free movement; cross-border procurement; procedure

Marko Turudić

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 16 (2021), Issue 3, Page 246 - 249

Peter Hettich, Daria Lenherr-Segmüller

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 2, Page 182 - 185

Ricardo Pedro

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 3, Page 225 - 235

In recent years Portugal has developed diferent regimes of public arbitration, especially in administrative law. The option to find an alternative to the courts, namely to solve conflits in public procurement is an ongoing project and naturaly a solution with advantages and disavantages. This study deals with some aspects of the general theory of administrative arbitration: not only the traditional matters, but also the recent changes to the Portuguese Code of Procedure in Administrative Courts (CPTA), as well as other aspects that we believe should deserve greater attention from the Authors. In addition, the rules on arbitration set out in the Portuguese Public Procurement Code are addressed. Finally, some notes are included on urgent administrative arbitration, in particular on the regime of ‘pre-contractual arbitration litigation’ resulting from the recent amendments to the CPTA. Keywords: administrative arbitration, urgency, public procurement, administrative procedure, appeals of arbitration decisions

Julien Gaul, Vera Van Thuyne

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 3, Page 236 - 241

The annotated case deals with the particular situation of a preselected candidate in a restricted procedure who has agreed to acquire another preselected candidate, under a merger agreement concluded between the preselection stage and the tendering stage, but completed after the tendering stage. The absorbing candidate eventually submitted a tender while the absorbed candidate did not. The CJEU decided that there was no reason to state, in view of the circumstances of the case, that the tender should be excluded. According to the Court of Justice, even though the substantive identity of the preselected candidate had changed before submitting the tender, there was no violation of the principle of equality, since the tenderer still complied with the selection criteria. It could also not be presumed that the two preselected candidates had exchanged sensitive information that put the other tenderers at a competitive disadvantage.

Federica Maldari

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 1, Page 75 - 79

The case deals with the interpretation of Article 7(2) and (4) of Regulation (EC) 1370/2007 on public passenger transport services relating to the direct award of the public service contract, by paying attention to the opening of the transport services sector to competition. The request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU concerning the interpretation of those provisions was part of the proceedings between the Italian Competition Authority and the Region of Sardinia on the direct award of the contract for the transport of passengers by rail to Trenitalia S.p.A. by that Region. The referring Court asked the Court of Justice whether those provisions must be interpreted as meaning that the competent authority which intends to award a contract directly must take the necessary steps to open the transport services sector to competition by publishing or communicating, to all interested economic operators, all the information necessary to allow them to submit a serious and reasonable offer, and by carrying out a comparative assessment of all bids. Keywords: Direct award procedure; Tender procedure; Public passenger transport services; Competition; Bids; Prior information notice; Comparative assessment; Obligation of motivation.

Slavica Joković

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 14 (2019), Issue 3, Page 174 - 179

This article examines relevant provisions of the public procurement legislation in Serbia that concerns competition, such as principle of ensuring competition and competitive public procurement procedures. Efficient implementation of this legislative framework is essential for enhancing competition in the public procurement market. Furthermore, the article gives a review of some measures introduced in fighting against anticompetitive practice. Finally, it analyses the role of competent institutions in Serbia in the area of public procurement and competition. Keywords: Competition; Public Procurement legislation; Public Procurement principles; Public Procurement procedures; Anticompetitive practice; Acquis communautaire.

Zbigniew Raczkiewicz

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 13 (2018), Issue 4, Page 344 - 349

In February 2018 General Court of the European Union delivered a Judgment in Case T-292/15. The Court agreed, partially, with the arguments raised by the Applicant, that the contracting authority (European Commission) committed irregularities in the procurement procedure ‘Consolidation of the Food Safety System in Albania (EuropeAid/129820/C/SER/AL). Consequently, the European Commission has been ordered to pay compensation for the damages suffered by the Applicant in relation to the loss of an opportunity to be awarded the contract and for the costs and expenses related to the participation in the procurement procedure.