Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1. Approximation of laws — Review procedures relating to the award of public supply and public works contracts — Directive 89/665 — Member States under an obligation to provide for review procedures — Access to review procedures limited to persons who have been or risk being harmed by the alleged infringements — Whether permissible — (Council Directive 89/665, Art. 1(3))

2. Approximation of laws — Review procedures relating to the award of public supply and public works contracts — Directive 89/665 — Member States under an obligation to provide for review procedures — Tenderer whose bid should have been eliminated before the selection — Access to review procedures refused because the tenderer neither has been nor risks being harmed — Not permissible — (Council Directive 89/665, Art. 1(3))

Summary

1. Article 1(3) of Directive 89/665 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Directive 92/50 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, does not preclude the review procedures laid down by the directive being available to persons wishing to obtain a particular public contract only if they have been or risk being harmed by the infringement they allege.

see para. 19, operative part 1

2. Article 1(3) of Directive 89/665 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Directive 92/50 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, does not permit a tenderer to be refused access to the review procedures laid down by the directive to contest the lawfulness of the decision of the contracting authority not to consider his bid as the best bid, on the ground that his bid should have been eliminated at the outset by the contracting authority for other reasons and that therefore he neither has been nor risks being harmed by the unlawfulness which he alleges. In the review procedure thus open to the tenderer, he must be allowed to challenge the ground of exclusion on the basis ofwhich the review body intends to conclude that he neither has been nor risks being harmed by the decision he alleges to be unlawful.

see para. 29, operative part 2