scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

If it Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It’? EU Requirements of Administrative Oversight and Judicial Protection for Public Contracts

TLDR
In this paper, the authors take issue with the shelving of the revision process and critically assess whether the Remedies Directive is still fit for purpose, and suggest that the European Commission should relaunch the review process as a matter of high priority.
Abstract
EU public procurement law relies on the specific enforcement mechanisms of the Remedies Directive, which sets out EU requirements of administrative oversight and judicial protection for public contracts. Recent developments in the case law of the CJEU and the substantive reform resulting from the 2014 Public Procurement Package may have created gaps in the Remedies Directive, which led the European Commission to publicly consult on its revision in 2015. One year after, the outcome of the consultation has not been published, but such revision now seems to have been shelved. This chapter takes issue with the shelving of the revision process and critically assesses whether the Remedies Directive is still fit for purpose. The chapter focuses on selected issues, such as the interplay between the Remedies Directive and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and with the general administrative law of the Member States. It also assesses the difficulties of applying the Remedies Directive ‘as is’ to some of the new rules of the 2014 Public Procurement Package, which creates uncertainty as to its scope of application, and gives rise to particular challenges for the review of exclusion decisions involving the exercise of discretion. The chapter also raises some issues concerning the difficulties derived from the lack of coordination of different remedies available under the Remedies Directive and briefly considers the need to take the development of ADR mechanisms into account. Overall, the chapter concludes that there are important areas where the Remedies Directive requires a revision, and submits that the European Commission should relaunch the review process as a matter of high priority.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Exclusion, Qualitative Selection and Short-listing

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide some initial thoughts on the new rules on exclusion, qualitative selection and short-listing in the new public sector procurement directive bound to repeal Directive 2004/18.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Emergence of Trans-EU Collaborative Procurement: A 'Living Lab' for European Public Law

TL;DR: In this article, the authors assess the EU legislative competence in this area, extract consequences for balancing trans-EU collaboration with "mandatory public law requirements" at Member State level and propose minimum functional guarantees to be expected in the implementation of Trans-EU collaborative procurement.
References
More filters
BookDOI

Alternative Dispute Resolution in European Administrative Law

TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a theoretical and empirical analysis of the ADR tools in the context of the European Administrative Space and compare them with the Ombudsman in the United Kingdom.
Journal ArticleDOI

The Purpose of the EU Procurement Directives: Ends, Means and the Implications for National Regulatory Space for Commercial and Horizontal Procurement Policies

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide a framework for understanding the directives' functions and their relationship with national policy, and suggest a specific legal interpretation of its actual and potential role in the EU's legal framework.
Posted Content

The Implementation of European Union Law by Member States Under Article 51(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that this minimalist approach simply begs the question of whether or not EU law applies in any specific case, a gateway question that the Court of Justice has been historically ill-equipped to answer.