Skip to content
  • «
  • 1
  • »

The search returned 6 results.

How Will the Adoption of Mandatory GPP Criteria Change the Game? journal article open-access

Lessons from the Italian Experience

Aura Iurascu

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 18 (2023), Issue 1, Page 6 - 16

With the 2003 Communication on Integrated Product Policy, the European Commission started focusing more on ‘greening’ Member States’ public procurement law, by encouraging the adoption of National Action Plans (NAPs). Subsequently, with the 2008 Communication, green public procurement (GPP) criteria were developed. Since then, the Commission has developed more than 20 standard GPP criteria, which are currently applied voluntarily. Recently, the EU Commission indicated that they are working on mandating GPP criteria and several legislative proposals are foreseeing the setup of mandatory EU GPP criteria for all Member States. Some domestic legislations have already introduced mandatory GPP criteria. In particular, the Italian legislator followed up the Commission’s initiative on NAPs, and adopted mandatory minimum environmental criteria (MECs) for 18 purchasing categories. This article aims to describe and compare the evolution of GPP criteria in the EU and Italy to illustrate and anticipate possible outcomes for the forthcoming mandatory GPP at the EU level. By doing so, the paper emphasises the prominent role played by the Italian Council of State in ensuring the mandatory minimum for environmental criteria in Italian law. Finally, it argues that the Italian approach, which uses the ineffectiveness of the contract as a general and well-established remedy, has proven successful in ensuring the enforcement of MECs. Keywords: GPP criteria; sustainable public procurement; mandatory minimum environmental criteria; Italian public procurement law; ineffectiveness of public contract

‘Who’s Afraid to Cooperate?’: CJEU Adopts Strict View on Non-Institutionalised Cooperation journal article

Annotation of the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Fourth Chamber) of 28 May 2020 in Case C-796/18 Informatikgesellschaft für Software-Entwicklung (ISE) mbH v Stadt Cologne and of the Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 June 2020 in Case C-429/19 Remondis GmbH v Abfallzweckverband Rhein-Mosel-Eifel

Stéphanie De Somer, Laura Hofströssler

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 3, Page 242 - 251

Over the past twenty years, the Court of Justice of the European Union rendered multiple judgments on the subject of exemptions from public procurement law. This case law has been consolidated in the current Public Procurement Directive. The cases examined in the present annotation offered the Court a first opportunity to further clarify the non-institutionalised cooperation exemption in light of this Directive. The Court has seized this occasion to emphasise its strict position on exempted non-institutionalised cooperation once again.

Legal Remedies for Public Private Partnerships in China journal article

Ziwei Zhang

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 3, Page 216 - 224

Although improving the quality and efficiency of public services, Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) are vulnerable to risks and disputes. Therefore, establishing effective legal remedies is of great significance to PPPs. In China, the existing regulations of remedies for PPPs have some problems, eg regarding aspects of the remedies’ subjects, triggering conditions, and methods. To improve PPPs’ legal remedies, the remedies’ subjects and triggering conditions should be broadened, the remedies’ methods should be reformed, and the applicable legal framework should be further improved. Keywords: public private partnerships, public procurement law, dispute resolution, legal remedies, China

The Value of the Value for Money Principle: journal article

From a Public Private Partnership Perspective

Christina D. Tvarnø

European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Volume 15 (2020), Issue 4, Page 282 - 291

The article concerns Public Private Partnerships and the value for money principle. The article presents an analysis of the British value for money principle, the lack of similar principle in the EU public procurement law and the importance of value for money in regard to Public Private Partnerships. This article does not question the key principles of transparency, equal treatment, proportionality, non-discrimination, and competition but discusses the value for money as a relevant legal instrument in regard to Public Private Partnerships in EU public procurement law. Keywords: Public Private Partnerships, value for money, public procurement law, Britain, EU law

  • «
  • 1
  • »