«(Directive 93/36/EEC – Public supply contracts – Directive 89/665/EEC – Review procedures applicable to public contracts – Limitation period – Principle of effectiveness)»
|
I - 0000 | |||
|
I - 0000 | |||
(Council Directive 89/665)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)
27 February 2003 (1)
((Directive 93/36/EEC – Public supply contracts – Directive 89/665/EEC – Review procedures applicable to public contracts – Limitation period – Principle of effectiveness))
In Case C-327/00, REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia (Italy) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between Santex SpAand
Unità Socio Sanitaria Locale n. 42 di Pavia, interveners: Sca Mölnlycke SpA, Artsana SpA and Fater SpA , on the interpretation of Article 22 of Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 1) and Article 6(2) EU,THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,
after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:
having regard to the Report for the Hearing,
after hearing the oral observations of the Italian Government, the French Government and the Commission at the hearing on 6 December 2001,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 7 February 2002,
gives the following
On those grounds,
THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),
in answer to the questions referred to it by the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per la Lombardia by order of 23 June 2000, hereby rules: 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, as amended by Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, must be interpreted as imposing on the competent national courts, where it is established that, by its conduct, a contracting authority has rendered impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of the rights conferred by the Community legal order on a national of the Union who has been harmed by a decision of that contracting authority, an obligation to allow as admissible pleas in law alleging that the notice of invitation to tender is incompatible with Community law , which are put forward in support of an application for review of that decision, by availing itself, where appropriate, of the possibility afforded by national law of disapplying national rules on limitation periods, under which, when the period prescribed for bringing proceedings for review of the notice of invitation to tender has expired, it is no longer possible to plead such incompatibility.
Puissochet |
Schintgen |
Skouris |
Macken |
Cunha Rodrigues |
|
R. Grass |
J.-P. Puissochet |
Registrar |
President of the Sixth Chamber |