Ramavtalsupphandlingar - En konsekvensanalys av överprövningar vid ramavtalsupphandlingar ur ett rättsekonomiskt perspektiv
(2016) JURM02 20161Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- En betydande del av alla offentliga upphandlingar leder till upprättandet av ramavtal. Denna avtalsform anses vara att föredra vid tillfällen då den upphandlande myndigheten har svårighet att på förhand avgöra vilken volym som kommer behövas, vid vilken tidpunkt leveransen ska ske samt vid osäkerhet kring den exakta utformningen av kontraktsföremålet.
2014 godkände Europaparlamentet tre nya direktiv angående offentliga upphandlingar. Dessa skulle ha trätt i kraft senast den 18 april 2016, men har ännu inte implementerats (maj, 2016). Det öppnar för frågor angående vilka nya rättsregler som, trots förseningen, kommer gälla innan de nya reglerna träder i kraft med hjälp av principen om direkt effekt eller vilka nu gällande regler som... (More) - En betydande del av alla offentliga upphandlingar leder till upprättandet av ramavtal. Denna avtalsform anses vara att föredra vid tillfällen då den upphandlande myndigheten har svårighet att på förhand avgöra vilken volym som kommer behövas, vid vilken tidpunkt leveransen ska ske samt vid osäkerhet kring den exakta utformningen av kontraktsföremålet.
2014 godkände Europaparlamentet tre nya direktiv angående offentliga upphandlingar. Dessa skulle ha trätt i kraft senast den 18 april 2016, men har ännu inte implementerats (maj, 2016). Det öppnar för frågor angående vilka nya rättsregler som, trots förseningen, kommer gälla innan de nya reglerna träder i kraft med hjälp av principen om direkt effekt eller vilka nu gällande regler som påverkas av en direktivkonform tolkning. En utredning av gällande rätt, med EU-rättsliga bestämmelser i beaktande, visar att principen om direkt effekt troligtvis får en begränsad inverkan på ramavtalsområdet. Däremot är det en större sannolikhet att de nya direktiven har inflytande över nationella bestämmelser redan idag genom en direktivkonform tolkning.
Det är allmänt känt att offentliga upphandlingar överprövas i stor utsträckning. I detta arbete redovisas, genom en empirisk undersökning, i hur stor omfattning som offentliga upphandlingar av ramavtal överprövas samt vilka konsekvenser detta medför för de inblandade parterna. Resultatet visar att handläggningstiderna i domstol är långa för dessa mål samt att de i knappt hälften av fallen leder till beslut som är till nackdel för den upphandlande myndigheten. De frekventa överprövningarna och de långa handläggningstiderna orsakar stora kostnader, framförallt för den upphandlande myndigheten men även för vinnande leverantör. Både direkta kostnader i form av utgifter till följd av domstolsprocessen men även indirekta kostnader till följd av försenade kontraktstilldelningar.
En analys av detta utifrån ett rättsekonomiskt perspektiv visar att lagändringar kan utnyttjas till att minska antalet överprövningar vilket skulle leda till en ökad effektivitet vid offentliga upphandlingar av ramavtal och en ökad samhällsekonomisk vinning. Det är dock inte helt oproblematiskt då dessa åtgärder riskerar att minska rättssäkerheten på området något. Enligt min mening är emellertid den ökade samhällsekonomiska vinningen större än den riskerade förlusten i rättssäkerhet. De i arbetet föreslagna åtgärderna är därför, ur ett rättsekonomiskt perspektiv, både önskvärda och nödvändiga. (Less) - Abstract
- A considerable part of all public procurements leads to the establishment of a framework agreement. This form of agreement is considered to be preferable at times when the contracting authority has difficulty to determine the volume that will be needed, at which point delivery is to take place and in the case of uncertainty about the exact framing of the subject- matter of the contract.
In 2014, the European Parliament approved three new directives concerning public procurements. These should have been implemented in the national legislation no later than 18th of April 2016, but have yet not been implemented in the Swedish legislation (may, 2016). This opens up for questions regarding which of the new regulations that, despite the... (More) - A considerable part of all public procurements leads to the establishment of a framework agreement. This form of agreement is considered to be preferable at times when the contracting authority has difficulty to determine the volume that will be needed, at which point delivery is to take place and in the case of uncertainty about the exact framing of the subject- matter of the contract.
In 2014, the European Parliament approved three new directives concerning public procurements. These should have been implemented in the national legislation no later than 18th of April 2016, but have yet not been implemented in the Swedish legislation (may, 2016). This opens up for questions regarding which of the new regulations that, despite the delay, will have immediate impact by dint of the principle of direct effect or which of the current national rules that will be affected by an indirect interpretation. A study of existing law, with European legal provisions into account, shows that the principle of direct effect is likely to have limited impact on public procurements of framework agreements. On the other hand, it is a greater probability that the new directives will have an immediate influence on Swedish legislation regarding framework agreements by an indirect interpretation.
It is common knowledge that public procurements are being appealed in great extent. It is reported in this paper, through an empirical study, the extent to which that public contract by framework agreements are being appealed and what consequences this entails for the parties involved. The results show that the processing times in court are long for these lawsuits as well as the fact that almost half of the cases leads to decisions which are to the detriment of the contracting authority. The frequent appeals and the long processing times are causing significant costs, especially for the contracting authority but also for the winning supplier. Both direct costs in terms of expenditures as a result of the court process but also indirect costs as a result of the delayed contract assignments.
An analysis of this from a law and economic perspective shows that changes in the law can be used to reduce the number of appeals which would lead to increased efficiency in the procurement of framework agreements and increased socio-economic benefits. Nonetheless, it is not entirely unproblematic as these measures threaten to reduce the rule of law somewhat. In my opinion is the increased socio-economic benefit greater than the risk of loss of rule of law. Proposed measures are therefore, from a law and economic perspective, both desirable and necessary. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8873785
- author
- Wåhlin, Anton LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Public procurements of framework agreements
- course
- JURM02 20161
- year
- 2016
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- förvaltningsrätt, offentlig upphandling, rättsekonomi
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8873785
- date added to LUP
- 2016-08-02 14:49:50
- date last changed
- 2016-08-02 14:49:50
@misc{8873785,
abstract = {{A considerable part of all public procurements leads to the establishment of a framework agreement. This form of agreement is considered to be preferable at times when the contracting authority has difficulty to determine the volume that will be needed, at which point delivery is to take place and in the case of uncertainty about the exact framing of the subject- matter of the contract.
In 2014, the European Parliament approved three new directives concerning public procurements. These should have been implemented in the national legislation no later than 18th of April 2016, but have yet not been implemented in the Swedish legislation (may, 2016). This opens up for questions regarding which of the new regulations that, despite the delay, will have immediate impact by dint of the principle of direct effect or which of the current national rules that will be affected by an indirect interpretation. A study of existing law, with European legal provisions into account, shows that the principle of direct effect is likely to have limited impact on public procurements of framework agreements. On the other hand, it is a greater probability that the new directives will have an immediate influence on Swedish legislation regarding framework agreements by an indirect interpretation.
It is common knowledge that public procurements are being appealed in great extent. It is reported in this paper, through an empirical study, the extent to which that public contract by framework agreements are being appealed and what consequences this entails for the parties involved. The results show that the processing times in court are long for these lawsuits as well as the fact that almost half of the cases leads to decisions which are to the detriment of the contracting authority. The frequent appeals and the long processing times are causing significant costs, especially for the contracting authority but also for the winning supplier. Both direct costs in terms of expenditures as a result of the court process but also indirect costs as a result of the delayed contract assignments.
An analysis of this from a law and economic perspective shows that changes in the law can be used to reduce the number of appeals which would lead to increased efficiency in the procurement of framework agreements and increased socio-economic benefits. Nonetheless, it is not entirely unproblematic as these measures threaten to reduce the rule of law somewhat. In my opinion is the increased socio-economic benefit greater than the risk of loss of rule of law. Proposed measures are therefore, from a law and economic perspective, both desirable and necessary.}},
author = {{Wåhlin, Anton}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Ramavtalsupphandlingar - En konsekvensanalys av överprövningar vid ramavtalsupphandlingar ur ett rättsekonomiskt perspektiv}},
year = {{2016}},
}