scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

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

31 Jan 2018-Social Science Research Network (Bruylant, Bruxelles)-pp 495-534
TL;DR: 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.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
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.
Abstract: This paper provides 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. The assessment is based on a comparison with the equivalent rules under the current Directive, as well as on the problems and implementation difficulties that the author envisages.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
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.
Abstract: Trans-EU collaborative procurement is a fertile ‘living lab’ for the observation, theorisation and critical assessment of developments in European public law. This paper maps the emergence of this novel type of cross-border administrative collaboration and scrutinises the new rules of Directive 2014/24/EU, which evidence the tension between promoting economic co-operation across borders within the internal market and the concern to respect the Member States’ administrative autonomy. The paper critically assesses the EU legislative competence in this area, extracts consequences for balancing trans-EU collaboration with ‘mandatory public law requirements’ at Member State level and proposes minimum functional guarantees to be expected in the implementation of trans-EU collaborative procurement.

1 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
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.
Abstract: This paper provides 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. The assessment is based on a comparison with the equivalent rules under the current Directive, as well as on the problems and implementation difficulties that the author envisages.

3 citations