scholarly journals El carácter jurisdiccional de los tribunales de resolución de conflictos contractuales conforme a la jurisprudencia comunitaria

2018 ◽  
pp. 529
Author(s):  
Jacinto J. Marabel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Autonomous Communities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Free Competition ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Policies ◽  
Impacto Económico

Durante muchos años, la Unión Europea exigió al Reino de España articular una serie de medidas tendentes a garantizar los procedimientos de recurso en materia de adjudicación de contratos públicos. La materia tiene una importancia crucial en las políticas europeas y su impacto económico llega a alcanzar la quinta parte del PIB del conjunto de los Estados miembros. Por esta razón, se hizo necesaria la creación de órganos independientes con competencia en la resolución de este tipo de conflictos que velaran por el principio de libre concurrencia. El Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea considera que la naturaleza y funciones de tipo de órganos, que a partir del Tribunal Central de Recursos Contractuales se han extendido a gran parte de las Comunidades Autónomas, son asimilables a las de los órganos jurisdiccionales.For many years, the European Union demanded the Kingdom of Spain to articulate a series of measures to ensure the review procedures in the field of public procurement. The matter is of crucial importance in European policies and their economic impact can reach a fifth of the GDP of all the Member States. For this reason, the creation of independent bodies with competence in the resolution of such conflicts that shall ensure the principle of free competition was necessary. The Court of Justice of the European Union considered that the nature and functions of type of organs, which starting from the Public Procurement Review Central Administrative Court have been extended to much of the Autonomous Communities, are similar to the justice courts.

scholarly journals RELIABILITY UNDER EU PUBLIC PROCUREMENT LAW

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hana Kováčiková ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Procurement Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice

To exclude or not to exclude? A question asked by many contracting authorities when assessing bids submitted by tenderers, whose reliability might be compromised by their previous misbehaviour or even worst – a criminal offence. According to law, contracting authorities can exclude such tenderers. However, at the same time, tenderers should be allowed to adopt compliance measures aimed at remedying the consequences of their action. In this article the author analyses some aspects of discretional exclusion of tenderers with doubted reliability in the public procurement process according to the 2014 European Union´s Public Procurement Directive and the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

scholarly journals PROBLEMATICS OF AMENDMENTS MADE IN TENDER DOCUMENTS IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT – THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

2020 ◽  
pp. 164-183
Author(s):  
Una Skrastina ◽  
Dzeina Gaile
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Analytical Method ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Made In

During the procurement process, it is often found that the tenders submitted are deficient, for example, required documents are not submitted. Given the amount of information to be provided, the types of errors are different and can apply to the qualification of the tenderer, its technical or financial tender and other aspects. In each of these situation procurement commission must evaluate whether it is possible to correct the error or the tender should be rejected. The Public Procurement Law does not contain very detailed and clear regulation on this situation. Therefore decisions of contracting authorities are often challenged and found to be unfounded. It justifies the topicality of the study. The aim of the study is to summarize and analyze the findings of the European Court of Justice to determine what legal principles and considerations have to be taken into account in such situations and to make recommendations for further action in Latvia. Research methods used are descriptive, comparative and analytical method. The study will result in suggestions as to what conditions should be considered when assessing the possibility of corrections of the tender.

scholarly journals Assessing the Public Administration’s Intention in EU Economic Law: Chasing Ghosts or Dressing Windows?

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 93-121
Author(s):  
Albert SANCHEZ-GRAELLS
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Economic Law ◽  
Right To Good Administration ◽  
State Liability

AbstractHere I reflect on the role of subjective or intentional elements in EU economic law prohibitions, particularly in relation to rules concerning public administration. From a normative perspective, it is desirable to suppress the need for an assessment of subjective intent and to proceed with an objectified enforcement of such prohibitions. With this in view, I consider public procurement and Member State aid rules as two examples of areas of EU economic law subjected to interpretative and enforcement difficulties due to the introduction – sometimes veiled – of subjective elements in their main prohibitions. I establish parallels with other areas of EU economic law – such as antitrust, non-discrimination law and the common agricultural policy – and seek benchmarks to support the main thesis that such intentional elements need to be ‘objectified’, so that EU economic law can be enforced against the public administration to an adequate standard of legal certainty. This mirrors the development of the doctrine of abuse of EU law, where a similar ‘objectification’ in the assessment of subjective elements has taken place.I draw on the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union to support such ‘objectification’ and highlight how the Court has been engaging in such interpretative strategy for some time. The paper explores the interplay between this approach and more general protections against behaviour of the public administration in breach of EU law: the right to good administration in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the doctrine of State liability for infringement of EU law. I conclude with the normative recommendation that the main prohibitions of EU economic law should be free from subjective elements focused on the intention of the public administration.

COMMUNICATION TO THE PUBLIC AND ACCESSORY COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 496-499
Author(s):  
Christina Angelopoulos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Copyright Infringement ◽  
Communication To The Public ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Explicit Definition ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Gradual Accumulation ◽  
The Eu

In recent judgments, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has been developing its interpretation of the notion of “communication to the public”. This forms one of the exclusive rights of copyright holders that have been harmonised by the InfoSoc Directive (Directive 2001/29/EC (OJ 2001 L 167 p.1)). As was established in 2006 (Case C-306/05, Sociedad General de Autores y Editores de España (SGAE) v Rafael Hoteles, ECLI:EU:C:2006:764, at [31]), despite the lack of an explicit definition in that directive, the notion of a “communication to the public” must be given “an autonomous and uniform interpretation” throughout the EU. This finding initially resulted in the creation of a considerable amount of uncertainty for national courts. The gradual accumulation of information through subsequent CJEU judgments has begun to bring some clarity, while also raising new questions.

scholarly journals Liability threshold for damages in public procurement: the EFTA Court’s Fosen-Linjen saga

2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. OA25-OA35
Author(s):  
Albert Sanchez-Graells
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Procurement ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Nuclear Decommissioning ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Arguments ◽  
State Liability ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Correct Understanding

In this case comment, I explore the two EFTA Court Judgments in the Fosen-Linjen saga and their opposing views on the interaction between EU/EEA rules on procurement remedies and the more general principle of state liability for breaches of EU/EEA law. I review the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and, in particular, the perceived inconsistencies between the two 2010 judgments in Strabag and Spijker, which featured very prominently in the legal arguments submitted to the EFTA Court in both Fosen-Linjen cases. I also use the benchmark of the UK Supreme Court's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority judgment to support the view that Spijker reflects the correct understanding of EU/EEA law and that there should be no further debate about it. I submit that the Court of Justice of the European Union would be well-advised to (re)confirm the position enshrined in Spijker at the earliest opportunity, to avoid any perpetuation of this debate in the context of EU/EEA public procurement law.

scholarly journals The Notion of the European Union Trademark

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-31
Author(s):  
Jarmila Lazíková
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Distinctive Character ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe EU trademark law has recorded the important changes in the last years. The Community trademark in the past and the EU trademark at the present have become very popular legal measures not only in the EU Member States but also in the third countries. Its preferences are increasing year to year. The EU trademark may consist of a sign that fulfils two main attributes. Firstly, there is a distinctive character. Secondly, there is a capability of being represented on the Register of the EU trademarks. The second attribute is new and replaced the previous attribute - capability of being represented graphically. The interpretation of the above mentioned attributes is not possible without the judgements of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is necessary to take into account the kind of trademark, list of the goods and services, which should be signed by the trademark, and its perception by the public. The paper includes the main judgements of the Court of Justice of the European Union related to the interpretation of the sign that may be registered as the EU trademark. They are very helpful in the application practice of the European Union Intellectual Property Office and the national offices of the intellectual property as well.

scholarly journals The interpretation complying with EU law manifested in the case law unifying judgment No. 15/2013 of the Portuguese Supreme Court of Justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 82-96
Author(s):  
Carla Machado
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The One

This article aims to address the interpretation that has been made by Portuguese courts in relation to the concept of “communication of the work to the public” enshrined in Article 3 (1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001, duly transposed into the Portuguese legal order by Law No. 50/2006 of 24 August, which culminated in the drafting of the case law unifying judgment No. 15/2013. By verifying its content and analysing the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter CJEU), concerning the interpretation of that concept, we conclude that the said case law unifying judgment does not comply with EU law. Therefore, we will list, on the one hand, the inherent consequences regarding the upkeep of the interpretation that has been held by the Portuguese judicial authorities and, on the other, we will suggest solutions for the resolution of similar cases by appealing to the principle of conforming interpretation.

scholarly journals Fixed-Term work: Recent developments in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-89
Author(s):  
Anne Pieter van der Mei
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Framework Agreement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Permanent Workers ◽  
Service Employment

This contribution provides an analytical overview of recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the framework agreement on fixed-term work (FTW agreement). The cases discussed virtually all concerned fixed-term work in the public sector and, in essence, raise the delicate question of whether the non-discrimination rule and the rules on fighting abuse of successive fixed-term employment relationships, demand from Member States to sacrifice classic notions of public service employment. The case law reveals that the Court leaves the Member States considerable discretion in hiring fixed-term workers instead of permanent workers or civil servants.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document