scholarly journals Qualification Requirements for Foreign Suppliers in Public Procurement – Evidence from the Czech Republic

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-39
Author(s):  
Martin Vyklický ◽  
Petr Man ◽  
Rudolf Franz Heidu ◽  
Radek Jurčík
Keyword(s):  
Public Procurement ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Current State ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Qualification requirements for foreign suppliers in Public Procurement (PP) are quite different in each European Union (EU) member state. The most complex requirements for foreign suppliers in the context of public purchases are included in the Czech PP law. The aim of this paper is to make an overview of the problem of qualification requirements for foreign suppliers in the PP law of the CR. Its sub-objectives are the identification and explanation of solutions to the problem in the PP legislation of neighboring countries of the CR that are also members of the EU. The methodological part of the contribution is based mainly on the analysis and critical evaluation of the current state of legal issues relating to the proof of qualification of foreign suppliers in PP orders of the CR; with examples of fairly extensive decision-making practices of the Office for the Protection of Competition and law courts, including the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice. The paper highlights the unnecessary complexity of qualification requirements that, on purely formal grounds, inhibits submissions of tenders from potential foreign suppliers that would otherwise be able to submit a bid for a public contract without any problems whatsoever. The authors are using and applying a comparative-legal method in the context of the comparison of the PP legislation of neighboring countries of the CR that are also members of the EU. The case study of foreign suppliers bidding for above-threshold public tenders in the CR at the minimum legal requirements of the contracting authority (CA) for proof of qualification, the comparation study with selected EU countries or analysis of the development of the proportion of public contracts awarded to foreign suppliers in 2010–2014 shows that there is legislation uncertainty in EU PP law that should be reduced and simplified on an EC basis.

scholarly journals Public procurement culture after accession to the EU – The case of a Central European transition country

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-61
Author(s):  
Tünde Tátrai
Keyword(s):  
Public Procurement ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Transition Country ◽  
Central European ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Public ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Slow Learning

Understanding and implementing European public procurement directives does not mean that countries that joined the European Union at a later stage were immediately able to adjust to their logic. It is not necessarily a problem of skills; cumbersome and slow learning is due much more to cultural differences, and lack of practice and knowledge of the interpretation of law by the European Court of Justice. This article sums up the results of four surveys presenting the changes in Hungary’s public procurement culture over 10 years, which has a useful message for other more recent Member States.

scholarly journals The Untouchable Nature of the ‘EU Seal Regime’—Is the European Union Liable for the Damages Suffered by the Canadian Inuit Due to the Violation of WTO Law in EC—Seal Products?

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 403-414
Author(s):  
Martin Hennig
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Economic Damage ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Current State ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In this article, the author assesses whether Canadian Inuit sealers, who have suffered economic damage in the wake of the introduction of the European Union (EU) ban on seal products, can bring an action for damages against the EU before the European Court of Justice. The author reviews why the EU ban on seal hunting violates World Trade Office (WTO) law and discusses if, and why, Canadian Inuit sealers can rely on a violation of the WTO Agreements as a legal basis in a potential claim for damages under EU law. Moreover, the author criticizes the current state of EU law, which does not grant reparation of the economic damage suffered by indigenous communities when carrying out their traditional seal hunts that are protected under UN human rights law.

‘Between a rock and a hard place?’: The European Union’s financial sanctions against suspected terrorists, multilateralism and human rights

2012 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Léonard ◽  
Christian Kaunert
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Standards ◽  
Hard Place ◽  
The Eu

This article focuses on the financial sanctions adopted by the European Union (EU) against individuals suspected of involvement in terrorist activities. This sanctions regime has been sharply criticised for its negative impact on human rights and has seen several judicial challenges before the European Courts. In contrast with most of the existing literature, which focuses on legal issues or examines the consequences of the EU financial sanctions, this article takes a step back to examine the reasons for which the EU decided to adopt these controversial financial sanctions in the first place. This article argues that it is mainly its commitment to ‘UN-centred effective multilateralism’ that has led the EU to adopt these financial sanctions measures in order to align itself with the UN financial sanctions regime. However, the Kadi landmark ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has challenged the pre-eminence of multilateralism over other considerations, such as the respect for human rights. As the Court of Justice prepares to hand down its second judgment in this case, the EU is left torn between its commitment to multilateralism and its commitment to human rights, which can be fully reconciled only if the UN sanctions regime meets the EU’s human rights standards.

5. Supremacy of EU law

2020 ◽  
pp. 131-152
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Czech Republic ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This chapter focuses on the supremacy of European Union (EU) law over the law of the member states and the relationship with international law. It suggests that the reasons and logic for the supremacy of the EU law have been developed through the decisions and interpretation of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) and provides relevant cases to illustrate the views of the CJEU on the superiority of EU law. It also considers the transfer and division of competences. This chapter also describes the reception and implementation of EU law in several member states, including Germany, Italy, France, the Czech Republic, Denmark, and Spain.

Das PSPP-Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts: Umfang der Übertragung von Souveränität und Überprüfung von Ermessensgebrauch

IG ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 220-226
Author(s):  
Achim-Rüdiger Börner
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
National Constitution ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Eu

In its judgment of 5 May 2020, the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has held that the Public Sector Purchase Programme (PSPP) of the European Central Bank (ECB), which started in 2015, and the relevant decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of 11 December 2018, holding that the programme is compatible with European Union (EU) law, are ultra vires acts. Indeed, this decision is based on a French understanding of discretion which has previously been adopted in the European Treaties and according to which discretion is controlled only for undue, illegal influence. Today, the Treaties have adopted a review of discretion under the aspects of suitability, necessity, and appropriateness. Moreover, criticism at the decision of the FCC neglects that the accession to and the membership in the EU have to observe the thresholds of the respective national constitution, as its violation is not and may not be expected by the Union or any other Member State. Ultra vires acts of the Union, which remain uncorrected by the Union itself, are subject to disapproval and rejection by the constitutional court of any Member State.

The Practices of ‘Splitting’ and ‘Common Accord’ Under Scrutiny: the European Parliament‘s Request for an Opinion of the European Court of Justice on the Istanbul Convention

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 472-486
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Samoilova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Forms Of Violence ◽  
Istanbul Convention ◽  
The Eu

Abstract With all eyes on the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, another pandemic has been growing in the shadows: violence against women. The Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention creates a legal framework in order to protect women against all forms of violence. Its ratification process, however, has faced considerable challenges, particularly in the Central and Eastern European Member States. This article discusses the basic elements of the Istanbul Convention, reflects on the ratification process in the EU and its Member States, and sets out the main legal issues raised in the European Parliament’s request for an opinion (A-1/19 of 22 November 2019) to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Special focus is put on the choice of the correct EU legal basis and the practices of ‘splitting’ and ‘common accord’. This article argues that the European Parliament’s request for an opinion provides the perfect opportunity for the Court of Justice of the European Union to further clarify the law and the practice of concluding mixed agreements by the EU and its Member States.

Public Procurement in the Czech Republic

2012 ◽  
pp. 210-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jirí Novosák ◽  
Oldrich Hájek ◽  
Jirí Machu
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Czech Republic ◽  
Regional Development ◽  
Small And Medium Enterprises ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Regional Disparities ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Medium Enterprises

Relations between public procurement, regional development, and e-procurement are discussed in this chapter. First, main themes of the debate are reviewed. Subsequently, some relations between public procurement, regional development, and e-procurement are discussed. The Czech Republic is used as a case study in this regard. The authors’ findings confirm the potential of public procurement to stimulate development of Czech regions. Spatially, public procurement may not be regarded as a suitable tool for reduction of regional disparities. However, there seems to be an important impact of public procurement on the development of local small and medium enterprises. In addition, the authors’ findings point at some links between public procurement and the concepts of sustainable development and competitiveness. Nevertheless, the dominant position of price as evaluation criterion indicates that the linkages are rather weak. Finally, the increasing interest of the Czech Republic in e-procurement was documented.

European Union Public Procurement Remedies Regimes

2012 ◽  
pp. 162-184
Author(s):  
Kai Krüger
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Eu

The chapter explores the Nordic statutory EU-based remedy regimes. Due to the European Economic Area (EEA) agreement, the EU commitments do not vary between EU member states, Denmark, Finland, and Sweden and (non-members) Norway and Iceland. The legislation on procurement remedies is assumed to be EU/EEA compliant. There are however material differences in the set up for handling disputes and complaints—also subsequent to the 2010-2012 Nordic adaptation of EU Directive 2007/66/EC on enhanced procurement remedies. The pending issue is whether the EU “sufficiently serious breach” principle on treaty infringements applies on liability for procurement flaws. Loss of contract damage has been awarded in all Nordic countries, whereas cases on negative interest (costs in preparing futile tender bids) seem more favorable to plaintiffs. Per mid-2012, there are no Nordic rulings on the effect of the recent somewhat ambiguous EU Court of Justice Strabag and Spijkers 2010 rulings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document