Advanced

Preklusionsfrist i mål om offentlig upphandling - En juridisk och rättsekonomisk studie

Nilsson, Jacob LU (2016) LAGM01 20152
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Ett problem vid offentlig upphandling är att leverantörerna under hela upphandlingsprocessen kan överpröva upphandlingen. En leverantör kan således enligt gällande rätt klaga på något i anbudsskedet fram till och med utgången av den frist som följer av avtalsspärren. En sen överprövning av ett tidigt fel i upphandlingen riskerar att leda till att upphandlingen behöver göras om. Problemet är inte endast ett juridiskt problem utan kan även få ekonomiska konsekvenser för parterna i ett upphandlingsförfarande. Uppsatsen utreder därför frågan om en processuell preklusionsfrist i mål om offentlig upphandling. För frågan undersöks dels förhållandet mellan den nationella rätten och EU-rätten, dels transaktionskostnaderna för att tilldela ett... (More)
Ett problem vid offentlig upphandling är att leverantörerna under hela upphandlingsprocessen kan överpröva upphandlingen. En leverantör kan således enligt gällande rätt klaga på något i anbudsskedet fram till och med utgången av den frist som följer av avtalsspärren. En sen överprövning av ett tidigt fel i upphandlingen riskerar att leda till att upphandlingen behöver göras om. Problemet är inte endast ett juridiskt problem utan kan även få ekonomiska konsekvenser för parterna i ett upphandlingsförfarande. Uppsatsen utreder därför frågan om en processuell preklusionsfrist i mål om offentlig upphandling. För frågan undersöks dels förhållandet mellan den nationella rätten och EU-rätten, dels transaktionskostnaderna för att tilldela ett kontrakt i förhållande till överprövningsreglerna. Utredningen undersöker även förslaget om en ”mellanväg” som Överprövningsutredningen har lagt fram för frågan om en preklusionsfrist.
Mot bakgrund av EU-domstolens uttalanden och den bakomliggande EU- rätten kan gällande rätt ifrågasättas. Uppsatsens slutsats är att gällande rätt för överprövning inte överensstämmer med EU-rätten på området. Avsaknaden av en preklusionsregel i den nationella rätten leder till att en leverantör under hela upphandlingsprocessen kan överpröva upphandlingen med risk för att upphandlingen behöver göras om. I förhållande till EU- domstolens uttalanden om hur direktiv 89/665/EEG ska tolkas riskerar ett sådant förhållande äventyra rätten till en effektiv och skyndsam domstolsprövning. Leverantörernas rätt till en effektiv och skyndsam prövning kan därför inte anses vara uppfylld. Förslaget om en mellanväg, för frågan om en preklusionsfrist, läker endast delvis bristen i det nationella genomförandet av EU-rätten. Förslaget uppställer inget krav på skyndsam domstolsprövning, utan förhindrar endast leverantörerna från att kunna överpröva en upphandling under hela upphandlingsprocessen. Således harmonierar inte gällande rätt eller förslaget om genomförande av rättsmedelsdirektivet med EU-rätten. Ur ett samhällsekonomiskt perspektiv kan även gällande rätt för överprövning klandras för att inte uppställa regler som maximerar nyttan av skattemedel eller minskar transaktionskostnaderna för parterna. Utformningen på överprövningsreglerna kan därför öka eller minska den samhällsekonomiska effekten av offentlig upphandling. Mot bakgrund av EU-rätten är det eftersträvansvärt att införa en preklusionsregel som förutsätter en skyndsam domstolsprövning. Även ur ett samhällsekonomiskt perspektiv är ett sådant införande önskvärt. (Less)
Abstract
A problem in swedish law regarding public procurement is that suppliers during the whole procurement process can retry the procurement. Applicable law grants the right to apply for review concerning anything in the tender stage of the procurement until the expiry of the standstill period. Thus, a late review, may result in that the entire procurement procedure needs to be redone. This is not only a legal problem, it can also have economic consequences for the parties in a procurement procedure. This thesis therefore examine procedural preclusion to proceedings relating to public procurement. First, the relationship between national law and European law, concerning the rules of review, are examined, Secondly, the transaction costs of... (More)
A problem in swedish law regarding public procurement is that suppliers during the whole procurement process can retry the procurement. Applicable law grants the right to apply for review concerning anything in the tender stage of the procurement until the expiry of the standstill period. Thus, a late review, may result in that the entire procurement procedure needs to be redone. This is not only a legal problem, it can also have economic consequences for the parties in a procurement procedure. This thesis therefore examine procedural preclusion to proceedings relating to public procurement. First, the relationship between national law and European law, concerning the rules of review, are examined, Secondly, the transaction costs of entering into a contract, through public procurement, in relation to the rules of review, are examined. The thesis also examines the proposal of a preclusion rule made by Överprövningsutredningen.

The conclusion in this thesis is that swedish law, concerning the rules of review, does not comply with the EU law. The lack of limitation periods for bringing proceedings, grants the suppliers the right to review the procurement throughout the procurement procedure, with the risk that the procurement needs to be redone. In relation to the interpretation of Directive 89/665/EEG, made by the Court of Justice of the European Union, such circumstances undermine the requirement of effectiveness under Directive 89/665/EEG. Suppliers right to an effective review therefore can not be regarded as fullfilled. The proposal of a preclusion rule only partially heals this shortage in the national implementation of EU law. The proposal imposes no requirement of effective review, it only prevents suppliers from being able to retry the procurement during the entire procurement procedure. Therefore neither the applicable law nor the proposal, on the implementation of Directive 89/665/EEG, can be considered to comply with EU law. From an economic perspective, the rules of review, can be criticized for not maximize the benefit of taxes or reducing the transaction costs for the parties. The rules of review can increase or decrease the economic effects of public procurement. In the light of EU law, it is desirable to pass a law, concerning a preclusion rule, that requires an effective review. Even from an economic perspective, such a law is desirable.
The thesis conclusion is that the law in Sweden, concerning the rules of review, does not comply with the EU law. The lack of limitation periods for bringing proceedings leads to that a supplier throughout the procurement can review the procurement, with the risk that the procurement needs to be redone. In relation to the interpretation of Directive 89/665/EEG, made by the Court of Justice of the European Union, such circumstances undermine the requirement of effectiveness under Directive 89/665/EEG. Suppliers right to an effective review therefore can not be regarded as fullfilled. The proposal of a preclusion rule only partially heal the shortage in the national implementation of EU law. The proposal imposes no requirement of effective review, it only prevents suppliers from being able to retry the procurement during the entire procurement process. Therefore the applicable law or the proposal, on the implementation of Directive 89/665/EEG, can not be considered to comply with EU law. From an economic perspective, the rules of review, can be criticized for not maximize the benefit of taxes or reduce the transaction costs for the parties. The rules of review can increase or decrease the economic effects of public procurement. In the light of EU law, it is desirable to pass a law, concerning a preclusion rule, that requires an effective review. Even from an economic perspective, such a law is desirable. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Nilsson, Jacob LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Preclusion in case concerning public procurement - a legal and economic study
course
LAGM01 20152
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
EU law, administrative law
language
Swedish
id
8513526
date added to LUP
2016-02-05 09:32:38
date last changed
2016-02-05 09:32:38
@misc{8513526,
  abstract     = {A problem in swedish law regarding public procurement is that suppliers during the whole procurement process can retry the procurement. Applicable law grants the right to apply for review concerning anything in the tender stage of the procurement until the expiry of the standstill period. Thus, a late review, may result in that the entire procurement procedure needs to be redone. This is not only a legal problem, it can also have economic consequences for the parties in a procurement procedure. This thesis therefore examine procedural preclusion to proceedings relating to public procurement. First, the relationship between national law and European law, concerning the rules of review, are examined, Secondly, the transaction costs of entering into a contract, through public procurement, in relation to the rules of review, are examined. The thesis also examines the proposal of a preclusion rule made by Överprövningsutredningen.

The conclusion in this thesis is that swedish law, concerning the rules of review, does not comply with the EU law. The lack of limitation periods for bringing proceedings, grants the suppliers the right to review the procurement throughout the procurement procedure, with the risk that the procurement needs to be redone. In relation to the interpretation of Directive 89/665/EEG, made by the Court of Justice of the European Union, such circumstances undermine the requirement of effectiveness under Directive 89/665/EEG. Suppliers right to an effective review therefore can not be regarded as fullfilled. The proposal of a preclusion rule only partially heals this shortage in the national implementation of EU law. The proposal imposes no requirement of effective review, it only prevents suppliers from being able to retry the procurement during the entire procurement procedure. Therefore neither the applicable law nor the proposal, on the implementation of Directive 89/665/EEG, can be considered to comply with EU law. From an economic perspective, the rules of review, can be criticized for not maximize the benefit of taxes or reducing the transaction costs for the parties. The rules of review can increase or decrease the economic effects of public procurement. In the light of EU law, it is desirable to pass a law, concerning a preclusion rule, that requires an effective review. Even from an economic perspective, such a law is desirable.
The thesis conclusion is that the law in Sweden, concerning the rules of review, does not comply with the EU law. The lack of limitation periods for bringing proceedings leads to that a supplier throughout the procurement can review the procurement, with the risk that the procurement needs to be redone. In relation to the interpretation of Directive 89/665/EEG, made by the Court of Justice of the European Union, such circumstances undermine the requirement of effectiveness under Directive 89/665/EEG. Suppliers right to an effective review therefore can not be regarded as fullfilled. The proposal of a preclusion rule only partially heal the shortage in the national implementation of EU law. The proposal imposes no requirement of effective review, it only prevents suppliers from being able to retry the procurement during the entire procurement process. Therefore the applicable law or the proposal, on the implementation of Directive 89/665/EEG, can not be considered to comply with EU law. From an economic perspective, the rules of review, can be criticized for not maximize the benefit of taxes or reduce the transaction costs for the parties. The rules of review can increase or decrease the economic effects of public procurement. In the light of EU law, it is desirable to pass a law, concerning a preclusion rule, that requires an effective review. Even from an economic perspective, such a law is desirable.},
  author       = {Nilsson, Jacob},
  keyword      = {EU law,administrative law},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Preklusionsfrist i mål om offentlig upphandling - En juridisk och rättsekonomisk studie},
  year         = {2016},
}