This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62008CN0406
Case C-406/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (England and Wales) (Queen's Bench Division), Leeds District Registry, made on 18 September 2008 — Uniplex (UK) Ltd v NHS Business Services Authority
Case C-406/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (England and Wales) (Queen's Bench Division), Leeds District Registry, made on 18 September 2008 — Uniplex (UK) Ltd v NHS Business Services Authority
Case C-406/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (England and Wales) (Queen's Bench Division), Leeds District Registry, made on 18 September 2008 — Uniplex (UK) Ltd v NHS Business Services Authority
OJ C 301, 22.11.2008, p. 23–23
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
22.11.2008 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 301/23 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (England and Wales) (Queen's Bench Division), Leeds District Registry, made on 18 September 2008 — Uniplex (UK) Ltd v NHS Business Services Authority
(Case C-406/08)
(2008/C 301/36)
Language of the case: English
Referring court
High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division)
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Uniplex (UK) Ltd
Defendant: NHS Business Services Authority
Questions referred
Where an economic operator is challenging in national proceedings the award of a framework agreement by a contracting authority following a public procurement exercise in which he was a tenderer and which was required to be conducted in accordance with Directive 2004/18/EC (1) (and applicable implementing national provisions), and is in those proceedings seeking declarations and damages for breach of applicable public procurement provisions as regards that exercise and award:
|
(a) |
is a national provision such as Regulation 47(7)(b) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 which states that those proceedings are to be brought promptly and in any event within 3 months from the date when grounds for the bringing of the proceedings first arose, unless the Court considers that there is good reason for extending the period, to be interpreted, in light of Directive 89/665/EEC (2), Articles 1 and 2, and the Community law principle of equivalence and the Community law requirement for effective legal protection, and/or the principle of effectiveness, and having regard to any other relevant principles of EC law, as conferring an individual and unconditional right upon the tenderer against the contracting authority such that the time for the bringing of proceedings challenging such a tender exercise and award starts running as from the date when the tenderer knew or ought to have known that the procurement procedure and award infringed EC public procurement law or as from the date of breach of the applicable public procurement provisions; and |
|
(b) |
in either event how is a national court then to apply (i) any requirement for proceedings to be brought promptly and (ii) any discretion as to extending the national limitation period for the bringing of such proceedings? |
(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 L 134, p. 114).
(2) Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 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 (OJ L 395, p. 33).