Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document 62008CN0149

    Case C-149/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 11 April 2008 — Aktor Anonimi Tekhniki Etairia (Αktor A.T.E.) v Ethniko Simvoulio Radiotileorasis

    IO C 142, 7.6.2008, p. 20–20 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    11/04/2008
    Date lodged:
    11/04/2008
    Author:
    An Chúirt Bhreithiúnais
    Form:
    Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
    Authentic language:
    Gréigis
    Type of procedure:
    Tarchur le haghaidh réamhrialú
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Case affecting:
    Link

    7.6.2008   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 142/20

    Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece) lodged on 11 April 2008 — Aktor Anonimi Tekhniki Etairia (Αktor A.T.E.) v Ethniko Simvoulio Radiotileorasis

    (Case C-149/08)

    (2008/C 142/32)

    Language of the case: Greek

    Referring court

    Simvoulio tis Epikratias

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Claimant: Aktor Anonimi Tekhniki Etairia (Αktor A.T.E.)

    Defendant: Ethniko Simvoulio Radiotileorasis

    Intervener: Mikhaniki A.E.

    Questions referred

    1.

    Accepting that a national provision in accordance with which only all the members of a consortium without legal personality which has participated unsuccessfully in a public procurement procedure can bring a legal action against the act awarding the contract, and not consortium members individually, is not in principle contrary to Community law and specifically to Directive 89/665, and that that still applies where the legal action has initially been brought by all the members of the consortium but ultimately proves, as regards some of them, to be inadmissible, is it in addition necessary, from the viewpoint of application of that directive, to examine, in order to make a declaration of inadmissibility, whether those individual members thereafter retain the right to claim before another national court any damages which may be envisaged by a provision of national law?

    2.

    When it has been held by settled case-law of a national court that an individual member of a consortium may also bring an admissible legal action against an act falling within a public procurement procedure, is it compatible with Directive 89/665/EEC, interpreted in the light of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights as a general principle of Community law, to dismiss a legal action as inadmissible, because of a change to that settled case-law, without the person who has brought that legal action first being given either the opportunity to cure the inadmissibility or, in any event, the opportunity to set out, pursuant to the adversarial principle, his views relating to that issue?
    Top