Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62015CN0567

Case C-567/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 2 November 2015 — LitSpecMet UAB v Vilniaus lokomotyvų remonto depas UAB

OJ C 27, 25.1.2016, p. 12–13 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

25.1.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/12

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 2 November 2015 — LitSpecMet UAB v Vilniaus lokomotyvų remonto depas UAB

(Case C-567/15)

(2016/C 027/15)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Vilniaus apygardos teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: LitSpecMet UAB

Defendant: Vilniaus lokomotyvų remonto depas UAB

Third party: Plienmetas UAB

Questions referred

Must Article 1(9) of Directive 2004/18/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that a company:

—

which has been founded by a contracting authority which engages in activity in the field of rail transport, namely: management of public railway infrastructure; passenger and freight transportation;

—

which independently engages in business activity, establishes a business strategy, adopts decisions concerning the conditions of the company’s activity (product market, customer segment and so forth), participates in a competitive market throughout the European Union and outside the EU market, providing the services of rolling stock manufacture and rolling stock repair, and participates in procurement procedures connected with that activity, seeking to obtain orders from third parties (not the parent company);

—

which provides rolling stock repair services to its founder on the basis of in-house transactions and the value of those services represents 90 per cent of the company’s entire activity;

—

whose services provided to its founder are intended to ensure the founder’s passenger and freight transportation activity;

is not to be considered to be a contracting authority?

If the Court of Justice of the European Union determines that the company is to be considered to be a contracting authority in the circumstances set out above, must Article 1(9) of Directive 2004/18/EC be interpreted as meaning that the company loses the status of contracting authority where the value of the rolling stock repair services provided on the basis of in-house transactions to the contracting authority which is the company’s founder falls and constitutes less than 90 per cent or not the main part of the total financial turnover from the company’s activity?

(1)  Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114).

Top