17 kap. 10 § LOU - Konsten att utforma ändrings- och optionsklausuler i kontrakt och ramavtal
(2018) JURM02 20181Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- 17th chapter 10th § of the Swedish Public Procurement Act statues that a contract or a framework agreement may be modified without a new procurement procedure in accordance with a review clause or option, if the clause does not provide for modifications that would alter the overall nature of the contract. The review clause shall be set out in the initial procurement documents. Such a clause shall be clear, precise and unequivocal and state the conditions under which it may be used. Furthermore, such a clause shall state the scope and nature of possible modifications. The provision is an exception from the obligation to undergo a procurement procedure. This provision is one of many changes that came into force in January 2017 and it mainly... (More)
- 17th chapter 10th § of the Swedish Public Procurement Act statues that a contract or a framework agreement may be modified without a new procurement procedure in accordance with a review clause or option, if the clause does not provide for modifications that would alter the overall nature of the contract. The review clause shall be set out in the initial procurement documents. Such a clause shall be clear, precise and unequivocal and state the conditions under which it may be used. Furthermore, such a clause shall state the scope and nature of possible modifications. The provision is an exception from the obligation to undergo a procurement procedure. This provision is one of many changes that came into force in January 2017 and it mainly constitutes a codification of rulings from the European Court of Justice. This essay aims to examine how review clauses and options shall be drafted in order to conform with the provision. No types of clauses seem to be excluded from the scope of the provision, even though negotiation clauses are likely to be restricted. What is to be considered as the overall nature of a contract is still not clear. Unfortunately, there is a lack of rulings in this field of law. However, it can be noted that the draft of review clauses and options shall be done with consideration of the principles of equal treatment and transparency.
If a contract or a framework agreement is modified in accordance with a review clause that does not meet the requirements in the provision, it might be considered as a substantial modification. The European Court of Justice has stated that a substantial modification is regarded as if a new contract has been awarded, which requires a new procurement procedure. This entails that an illicit procurement procedure has been made. Consequently, the contracting authority will most likely be obliged to terminate the contract. Competing tenderers may file a review petition at the Administrative Court. This can also be made during the procurement process, even before a change has taken place. It is not certain whether only the new contract, or even the original contract, can be considered void. Furthermore, the contracting authority may be liable to pay damages and the Swedish Competition Authority may file a petition for procurement sanction charges. National contract law has a certain importance when drafting review clauses, since national contract law is applicable to the contract from the moment a tender has been submitted. This entails the applicability of rules such as nullity, annulation, damages and adjustment of a contract. In order to make sure that contractual consequences do not occur, the contractual rules must be taken into consideration when drafting a review clause or option. However, the applicability of 17th chapter 10th § is a result of the reactualization of the principles of equal treatment and transparency. This entails that procurement law and national contract law is parallelly applicable to the contract under the period of performance. The mutual relation between these two fields of law is not clear. However, the principle of priority for EU-law and the principle of conform interpretation will presumably entail a limitation of contract law in case of conflict. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- 17 kap. 10 § LOU stadgar att ett kontrakt eller ramavtal får ändras i enlighet med en ändrings- eller optionsklausul utan att en ny upphandling måste genomföras, om kontraktets eller ramavtalets övergripande karaktär inte ändras, om klausulen har angetts i något av upphandlingsdokumenten och klart, exakt och entydigt beskriver under vilka förutsättningar den kan tillämpas. Vidare ska klausulen även ange omfattningen och arten av ändringarna som kan komma att göras. Bestämmelsen utgör ett undantag från huvudregeln om skyldigheten att upphandla. Denna bestämmelse är en av många bestämmelser som trädde ikraft i januari 2017 och utgör till stor del en kodifiering av praxis från EU-domstolen. Uppsatsen behandlar hur ändrings- och... (More)
- 17 kap. 10 § LOU stadgar att ett kontrakt eller ramavtal får ändras i enlighet med en ändrings- eller optionsklausul utan att en ny upphandling måste genomföras, om kontraktets eller ramavtalets övergripande karaktär inte ändras, om klausulen har angetts i något av upphandlingsdokumenten och klart, exakt och entydigt beskriver under vilka förutsättningar den kan tillämpas. Vidare ska klausulen även ange omfattningen och arten av ändringarna som kan komma att göras. Bestämmelsen utgör ett undantag från huvudregeln om skyldigheten att upphandla. Denna bestämmelse är en av många bestämmelser som trädde ikraft i januari 2017 och utgör till stor del en kodifiering av praxis från EU-domstolen. Uppsatsen behandlar hur ändrings- och optionsklausuler bör utformas för att uppfylla kraven i 17 kap. 10 § LOU. Det torde inte finnas några begränsningar avseende vilka typer av klausuler som är tillåtna. Vad avser omförhandlingsklausuler torde utrymmet för sådana dock kraftigt begränsas. Den övergripande karaktären är ett nytt rekvisit som ännu saknar definition. Det ankommer på rättstillämpningen att avgöra detta. Det kan dock konstateras att utformningen av ändrings- och optionsklausuler ska ske med beaktande av öppenhets- och likabehandlingsprincipen.
Om en ändring sker i strid med 17 kap. 10 § kan ändringen vara att anse som väsentlig. EU-domstolen har uttalat att väsentliga ändringar anses utgöra tilldelning av nytt kontrakt, vilket utlöser förnyad upphandlingsskyldighet. Detta medför att den upphandlande myndigheten gjort sig skyldig till otillåten direktupphandling. Följderna av detta är att den upphandlande myndigheten troligtvis är skyldig att avsluta kontraktet. Vidare kan de konkurrerande leverantörer som anser sig ha lidit skada eller kan komma att lida skada, ansöka om överprövning av avtalets giltighet hos förvaltningsrätten. Överprövning kan även ske om en klausul som inte synes uppnå kraven i 17 kap. 10 § upptäcks redan under upphandlingsprocessen. Det är oklart om endast det nya avtalet ska ogiltigförklaras eller även det ursprungliga. Den upphandlande myndigheten kan vidare bli skadeståndsskyldig. En annan följd som riskerar att inträffa är att Konkurrensverket ansöker om upphandlingsskadeavgift. Den allmänna avtalsrätten har en viss betydelse för utformningen av ändrings- och optionsklausuler genom att nationell avtalsrätt aktualiseras på förhållandet redan då ett anbud inges. Detta innebär att regler om ogiltighet, hävning, skadestånd och jämkning kan aktualiseras. På så vis måste de avtalsrättsliga reglerna beaktas vid utformningen av klausulerna för att inte riskera att avtalsrättsliga följder inträffar. Dock medför tillämpligheten av 17 kap. 10 § att öppenhets- och likabehandlingsprincipen kan återaktualiseras vid fullgörande av kontrakt. Detta får till följd att upphandlingsrätt och nationell avtalsrätt är parallellt tillämpliga under kontraktets fullgörandestadie. Den inbördes relationen mellan dessa två rättsområden är inte klarlagd, men vid konflikt torde avtalsrättens betydelse dock begränsas av upphandlingsrätten genom den EU-rättsliga företrädesprincipen och principen om direktivkonform tolkning. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8956716
- author
- Hodo, Beatrice LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- 17th chapter 10th § of the Swedish Public Procurement act - The drafting of review clauses and options in contracts and framework agreements
- course
- JURM02 20181
- year
- 2018
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Offentlig upphandling, civilrätt, EU-rätt.
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8956716
- date added to LUP
- 2018-09-07 14:47:56
- date last changed
- 2018-09-07 14:47:56
@misc{8956716,
abstract = {{17th chapter 10th § of the Swedish Public Procurement Act statues that a contract or a framework agreement may be modified without a new procurement procedure in accordance with a review clause or option, if the clause does not provide for modifications that would alter the overall nature of the contract. The review clause shall be set out in the initial procurement documents. Such a clause shall be clear, precise and unequivocal and state the conditions under which it may be used. Furthermore, such a clause shall state the scope and nature of possible modifications. The provision is an exception from the obligation to undergo a procurement procedure. This provision is one of many changes that came into force in January 2017 and it mainly constitutes a codification of rulings from the European Court of Justice. This essay aims to examine how review clauses and options shall be drafted in order to conform with the provision. No types of clauses seem to be excluded from the scope of the provision, even though negotiation clauses are likely to be restricted. What is to be considered as the overall nature of a contract is still not clear. Unfortunately, there is a lack of rulings in this field of law. However, it can be noted that the draft of review clauses and options shall be done with consideration of the principles of equal treatment and transparency.
If a contract or a framework agreement is modified in accordance with a review clause that does not meet the requirements in the provision, it might be considered as a substantial modification. The European Court of Justice has stated that a substantial modification is regarded as if a new contract has been awarded, which requires a new procurement procedure. This entails that an illicit procurement procedure has been made. Consequently, the contracting authority will most likely be obliged to terminate the contract. Competing tenderers may file a review petition at the Administrative Court. This can also be made during the procurement process, even before a change has taken place. It is not certain whether only the new contract, or even the original contract, can be considered void. Furthermore, the contracting authority may be liable to pay damages and the Swedish Competition Authority may file a petition for procurement sanction charges. National contract law has a certain importance when drafting review clauses, since national contract law is applicable to the contract from the moment a tender has been submitted. This entails the applicability of rules such as nullity, annulation, damages and adjustment of a contract. In order to make sure that contractual consequences do not occur, the contractual rules must be taken into consideration when drafting a review clause or option. However, the applicability of 17th chapter 10th § is a result of the reactualization of the principles of equal treatment and transparency. This entails that procurement law and national contract law is parallelly applicable to the contract under the period of performance. The mutual relation between these two fields of law is not clear. However, the principle of priority for EU-law and the principle of conform interpretation will presumably entail a limitation of contract law in case of conflict.}},
author = {{Hodo, Beatrice}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{17 kap. 10 § LOU - Konsten att utforma ändrings- och optionsklausuler i kontrakt och ramavtal}},
year = {{2018}},
}