public procurement – Page 7 – Current Awareness

“A member state was required to make legislative provision that, where a tenderer offered an abnormally low price in the course of a public procurement process pursuant to Directive 2004/18/EC, the contracting authority was obliged, pursuant to article 55 of the Directive, to ask the tenderer in writing to clarify its price proposal.”

WLR Daily, 29th March 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Alstom Transport v Eurostar International Ltd – WLR Daily

Posted January 25th, 2012 in contracts, EC law, law reports, public procurement, state aids, transport by sally

Alstom Transport v Eurostar International Ltd [2012] EWHC 28 (Ch); [2012] WLR (D) 4

“Regulation 3(2) of the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2006 (‘UCR’) should be construed as if it said that network ‘includes a system operated in accordance’ instead of ‘means a system operated in accordance’. The term ‘contracting authority’ in regulation 2(1) of the UCR and regulation 3(1) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (‘the PCR’) was restricted to domestic bodies only. The fact that an undertaking was able to continue trading only as a result of very substantial state aid did not preclude it from being of an industrial or commercial character within the terms of article 2(1) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/17/EC.”

WLR Daily, 20th January 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Strong Segurança SA v Município de Sintra and another – WLR Daily

Posted March 22nd, 2011 in EC law, law reports, public procurement, tenders by sally

Strong Segurança SA v Município de Sintra and another (Case C-95/10); [2011] WLR (D) 99

“Article 47(2) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/18/EC (permitting an economic operator participating in a public tendering process for the provision of services to rely on the capacities of other entities, provided that it could prove that it would have at its disposal the resources necessary) did not apply to contracts which had as their object services referred to in Annex IIB of the Directive, such as the provision of surveillance and security services. However member states and, possibly, contracting authorities, could provide for that which article 47(2) permitted in, respectively, their legislation and the documents relating to the contract.”

WLR Daily, 17th March 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Privater Rettungsdienst und Krankentransport Stadler v Zweckverband für Rettungsdienst und Feuerwehralarmierung Passau (Malteser Hilfdienst eV and another, intervening) – WLR Daily

Posted March 17th, 2011 in contracts, EC law, law reports, public procurement, service by sally

Privater Rettungsdienst und Krankentransport Stadler v Zweckverband für Rettungsdienst und Feuerwehralarmierung Passau (Malteser Hilfdienst eV and another, intervening) (Case C–274/09); [2011] WLR (D) 88

“A contract concerning rescue services under which the operator was fully remunerated by persons other than the contracting authority awarding the contract and which placed a limited operating risk on the operator was classified as a ‘service concession’ within the meaning of article 1(4) of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/18/EC, as distinct from a public contract or public service contract within article 1(2)(a)(d).”

WLR Daily, 10th March 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Please note that once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Ruling gives companies time and certainty in public procurement disputes – OUT-LAW.com

Posted February 1st, 2010 in news, public procurement, tenders, time limits by sally

“Companies now have more time to file legal objections to the award of public contracts after Europe’s top court overturned UK procurement law. The Government will have to re-draft its regulations and the ruling will take immediate effect.”

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 1st February 2010

Source: www.out-law.com

Chandler v Camden London Borough Council; Chandler v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families – WLR Daily

Posted February 18th, 2009 in EC law, education, judicial review, law reports, public procurement by sally

Chandler v Camden London Borough Council; Chandler v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families [2009] EWHC 219 (Admin); [2009] WLR (D) 58

“A parent of school age children could not be classed as an ‘economic operator’ and did not therefore have sufficient standing under European and domestic rules on public procurement to bring a claim for judicial review of a decision of the Secretary State to approve an expression of interest by a sponsor of an academy under s 482 of the Education Act 1996 (as substituted by s 65(1) of the Education Act 2002). The protection conferred by the procurement regime created by the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/5) could only be invoked in private law proceedings by affected economic operators.”

WLR Daily, 17th February 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Parents lose fight to stop ‘preferred bidder’ sponsoring London academy – The Guardian

Posted February 13th, 2009 in education, judicial review, news, public procurement by sally

“Parents and campaigners have lost a judicial review to prevent the government introducing academies without holding competitions to allow a range of sponsors to come forward.”

Full story

The Guardian, 13th February 2009

Source: www.guardian.co.uk