Master's Program 2004/2005 Technical and Fiscal Barriers ... - Lexnet

More documents

Recommendations

Info

61999J0513 European Court reports 2002 Page I-07213 14 the award criteria at issue in the main proceedings were objective and applied without distinction to all tenders. Next, the criteria were directly linked to the fleet offered and were an integral part of a system of awarding points. Finally, under that system, additional points could be awarded on the basis of other criteria linked to the fleet, such as the use of low-floor buses, the number of seats and tip-up seats and the age of the buses. 84 Moreover, as Concordia acknowledged at the hearing, it won the tender for route 15 of the Helsinki urban bus network, even though that invitation to tender specifically required the operation of gas-powered vehicles. 85 It must therefore be held that, in such a factual context, the fact that one of the criteria adopted by the contracting entity to identify the economically most advantageous tender could be satisfied only by a small number of undertakings, one of which was an undertaking belonging to the contracting entity, is not in itself such as to constitute a breach of the principle of equal treatment. 86 In those circumstances, the answer to the third question must be that the principle of equal treatment does not preclude the taking into consideration of criteria connected with protection of the environment, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, solely because the contracting entity's own transport undertaking is one of the few undertakings able to offer a bus fleet satisfying those criteria. The first question 87 By its first question, the national court essentially asks whether the answer to the second and third questions would be different if the procedure for the award of the public contract at issue in the main proceedings fell within the scope of Directive 93/38. 88 On this point, it must be noted, first, that the provisions of Article 36(1)(a) of Directive 92/50 and Article 34(1)(a) of Directive 93/38 have substantially the same wording. 89 Second, the provisions concerning award criteria 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 those of Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 54) also have substantially the same wording as those of Article 36(1)(a) of Directive 92/50 and Article 34(1)(a) of Directive 93/38. 90 It should be observed, third, that those directives taken as a whole constitute the core of Community law on public contracts and are intended to attain similar objectives in their respective fields. 91 In those circumstances, there is no reason to give a different interpretation to two provisions which fall within the same field of Community law and have substantially the same wording. 92 It should also be noted that the Court has already held, in paragraph 33 of Commission v Denmark, that the duty to observe the principle of equal treatment lies at the very heart of all the public procurement directives. The documents in the main proceedings have not disclosed anything to show that, as regards the contracting entity's choice of award criteria, the interpretation of that principle should depend in this case on the particular directive applicable to the contract in question. 93 The answer to the first question must therefore be that the answer to the second and third questions would not be different if the procedure for the award of the public contract at issue in the main proceedings fell within the scope of Directive 93/38. DOCNUM 61999J0513 © An extract from a JUSTIS database 76
61999J0513 European Court reports 2002 Page I-07213 15 AUTHOR Court of Justice of the European Communities FORM Judgment TREATY European Economic Community TYPDOC 6 ; CJUS ; cases ; 1999 ; J ; judgment PUBREF European Court reports 2002 Page I-07213 DOC 2002/09/17 LODGED 1999/12/28 JURCIT 61983J0274 : N 60 61987J0031 : N 59 62 63 61989J0243 : N 81 92 11992E130R-P2L1 : N 57 31992L0050-A01 : N 3 31992L0050-A36P1: N 1 3 35 37 39 31992L0050-A36P1LA : N 42 53 - 55 57 59 61 64 69 88 89 31992L0050-A36P2 : N 62 31992L0050 : N 41 42 31993L0036 : N 89 31993L0037 : N 89 31993L0038-A02P1 : N 5 31993L0038-A02P1LA : N 1 35 31993L0038-A02P2LC : N 1 5 35 31993L0038-A02P4 : N 1 5 35 31993L0038-A34 : N 6 31993L0038-A34P1: N 1 35 31993L0038-A34P1LA : N 37 39 88 89 31993L0038-A45P3-4 : N 6 31993L0038 : N 41 42 87 61993J0324 : N 59 11997E006 : N 57 61998J0225 : N 62 63 62000J0019 : N 54 56 59 61 CONCERNS Interprets 31992L0050-A36P1 Interprets 31993L0038-A02P1LA Interprets 31993L0038-A02P1LC Interprets 31993L0038-A02P4 Interprets 31993L0038-A34P1 SUB Freedom of establishment and services ; Right of establishment ; Free movement of services AUTLANG Finnish OBSERV Finland ; Greece ; Netherlands ; Austria ; Sweden ; United Kingdom ; Member States ; Commission ; Institutions © An extract from a JUSTIS database 77
Page 1 and 2:
Master’s Program 2004/2005 Techni
Page 3 and 4:
Alberta iela 13 LV-1010 Riga Latvia
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Session no. 18-21 16-21 Monday 19 S
Page 11 and 12:
61984J0178 European Court reports 1
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26: 61995J0189 European Court reports 1
Page 75: 61999J0513 European Court reports 2
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289:
show all

Master's Program 2004/2005 Technical and Fiscal Barriers ... - Lexnet

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?