Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Intern upphandling – Tillämpningen av verksamhetskriteriet i svensk och europeisk upphandlingsrätt

Meiby, Frida LU (2025) JURM02 20251
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
In-house exemption constitutes an exception to the fundamental obligation to subject public contracts to competitive tendering and may only be applied when certain criteria are met. One of these is the activity criterion, which requires that at least 80 percent of the procured entity’s activities are directed toward the contracting authority. The purpose of this criterion is to ensure that the fundamental principles of the internal market, particularly transparency, competition and equal treatment, are not circumvented through internal organizational arrangements.

Considering a growing need for legal clarity, this thesis analyzes the interpretation and application of the activity criterion under Swedish law, based on EU legal... (More)
In-house exemption constitutes an exception to the fundamental obligation to subject public contracts to competitive tendering and may only be applied when certain criteria are met. One of these is the activity criterion, which requires that at least 80 percent of the procured entity’s activities are directed toward the contracting authority. The purpose of this criterion is to ensure that the fundamental principles of the internal market, particularly transparency, competition and equal treatment, are not circumvented through internal organizational arrangements.

Considering a growing need for legal clarity, this thesis analyzes the interpretation and application of the activity criterion under Swedish law, based on EU legal provisions, principles, and case law. Emphasis is on the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has played a decisive role in shaping the exception. The criteria for the in-house exemption were first established in the Teckal-case. This case law later formed the basis for the codification in the EU Public Procurement Directive, which has since been transposed into Swedish legislation. By analyzing case law, the thesis provides insight into the purpose of the regulation and how the activity criterion should be interpreted within an EU law context.

The focus lies on two rulings from the administrative courts of appeal, the Administrative Court of Appeal in Gothenburg case no. 4018–22 and the Administrative Court of Appeal in Stockholm case no. 1232–24, both addressing the application of the activity criterion but reaching opposing conclusions. This highlights the legal uncertainty and interpretative ambiguity facing contracting authorities and their entities. These conflicting judgements underscore the need for precedential guidance. The Stockholm ruling, which has been granted leave to appeal by the Supreme Administrative Court, may prove to be highly significant for future legal application. Its outcome could impact how municipal actors organize their operations internally without breaching public procurement law.

The thesis concludes that the current legal position regarding the activity criterion is unclear and inconsistently applied, creating uncertainty for public bodies. The analysis suggests that the Stockholm ruling is more consistent with EU law, particularly considering the purposive interpretation employed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. At the same time, it opens the door to a more generous application of the exception, potentially expanding its scope in a way that conflicts with both EU law and the Swedish preparatory works, which stress that the exception should be interpreted restrictively. A forthcoming precedential judgement from the Supreme Administrative Court that clarifies the legal position would therefore be highly valuable for strengthening legal certainty and enabling lawful, efficient, and predictable use of in-house exemption within the public sector. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Intern upphandling utgör ett undantag från den grundläggande skyldigheten att konkurrensutsätta offentliga kontrakt och får endast tillämpas när vissa kriterier är uppfyllda. Ett av dessa är verksamhetskriteriet, som innebär att minst 80 procent av den upphandlade enhetens verksamhet ska rikta sig mot den upphandlande myndigheten. Kriteriet syftar till att säkerställa att den inre marknadens grundprinciper, särskilt öppenhet, konkurrens och likabehandling, inte åsidosätts genom intern organisering.

Mot bakgrund av ett växande behov av rättslig klarhet, analyserar uppsatsen verksamhetskriteriets tolkning och tillämpning i svensk rätt, med utgångs- punkt i EU-rättens regler, principer och rättspraxis. Särskilt behandlas EU- domstolens... (More)
Intern upphandling utgör ett undantag från den grundläggande skyldigheten att konkurrensutsätta offentliga kontrakt och får endast tillämpas när vissa kriterier är uppfyllda. Ett av dessa är verksamhetskriteriet, som innebär att minst 80 procent av den upphandlade enhetens verksamhet ska rikta sig mot den upphandlande myndigheten. Kriteriet syftar till att säkerställa att den inre marknadens grundprinciper, särskilt öppenhet, konkurrens och likabehandling, inte åsidosätts genom intern organisering.

Mot bakgrund av ett växande behov av rättslig klarhet, analyserar uppsatsen verksamhetskriteriets tolkning och tillämpning i svensk rätt, med utgångs- punkt i EU-rättens regler, principer och rättspraxis. Särskilt behandlas EU- domstolens avgöranden, som spelat en avgörande roll i utformningen av undantaget. Det var genom Teckal-målet som kriterierna för intern upphandling först formulerades, vars praxis senare låg till grund för EU:s upphandlingsdirektiv och dess införlivande i svensk rätt. Genom att analysera rättspraxis skapas en förståelse för syftet bakom regleringen och hur verksamhetskriteriet bör tolkas i ett unionsrättsligt sammanhang.

Fokus ligger på två domar från kammarrätterna, Kammarrätten i Göteborg mål nr 4018–22 och Kammarrätten i Stockholm mål nr 1232–24, som båda rör tillämpningen av verksamhetskriteriet men kommer till motsatta slutsatser. Detta belyser det rättsliga tolkningsutrymme som finns och den osäkerhet som därmed uppstår för upphandlande myndigheter och deras bolag. De två rättsfallen visar tydligt på behovet av prejudicerande vägledning. Stock- holmsmålet, som beviljats prövningstillstånd i Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen, kan få stor betydelse för framtida rättstillämpning. Utfallet kan komma att påverka kommunala aktörers möjligheter att organisera sin verksamhet internt, utan att bryta mot upphandlingslagstiftningen.

Uppsatsen visar att rättsläget kring verksamhetskriteriet är oklart och att tilllämpningen varierar, vilket skapar osäkerhet för offentliga aktörer. Analysen visar att Stockholms-målet är mer förenligt med EU-rätten, särskilt med hän- syn till EU-domstolens ändamålsinriktade tolkning. Samtidigt öppnar den upp för en mer generös tillämpning av undantaget, vilket innebär att undantaget kan tillämpas i större omfattning. Det riskerar att strida mot både EU-rättens och svenska förarbetens uttalade krav på en restriktiv tolkning. En framtida prejudicerande dom från HFD som klargör rättsläget skulle därför vara av stor betydelse för att stärka rättssäkerheten och möjliggöra en rättsenlig, effektiv och förutsebar användning av intern upphandling inom den offentliga sektorn. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Meiby, Frida LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
In-house exemption – The Application of the Activity Criterion in Swedish and European Public Procurement Law
course
JURM02 20251
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
förvaltningsrätt, offentlig upphandling, upphandlingsrätt, LOU, verksamhetskriteriet, intern upphandling
language
Swedish
id
9189070
date added to LUP
2025-06-09 17:46:50
date last changed
2025-06-09 17:46:50
@misc{9189070,
  abstract     = {{In-house exemption constitutes an exception to the fundamental obligation to subject public contracts to competitive tendering and may only be applied when certain criteria are met. One of these is the activity criterion, which requires that at least 80 percent of the procured entity’s activities are directed toward the contracting authority. The purpose of this criterion is to ensure that the fundamental principles of the internal market, particularly transparency, competition and equal treatment, are not circumvented through internal organizational arrangements.

Considering a growing need for legal clarity, this thesis analyzes the interpretation and application of the activity criterion under Swedish law, based on EU legal provisions, principles, and case law. Emphasis is on the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has played a decisive role in shaping the exception. The criteria for the in-house exemption were first established in the Teckal-case. This case law later formed the basis for the codification in the EU Public Procurement Directive, which has since been transposed into Swedish legislation. By analyzing case law, the thesis provides insight into the purpose of the regulation and how the activity criterion should be interpreted within an EU law context.

The focus lies on two rulings from the administrative courts of appeal, the Administrative Court of Appeal in Gothenburg case no. 4018–22 and the Administrative Court of Appeal in Stockholm case no. 1232–24, both addressing the application of the activity criterion but reaching opposing conclusions. This highlights the legal uncertainty and interpretative ambiguity facing contracting authorities and their entities. These conflicting judgements underscore the need for precedential guidance. The Stockholm ruling, which has been granted leave to appeal by the Supreme Administrative Court, may prove to be highly significant for future legal application. Its outcome could impact how municipal actors organize their operations internally without breaching public procurement law.

The thesis concludes that the current legal position regarding the activity criterion is unclear and inconsistently applied, creating uncertainty for public bodies. The analysis suggests that the Stockholm ruling is more consistent with EU law, particularly considering the purposive interpretation employed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. At the same time, it opens the door to a more generous application of the exception, potentially expanding its scope in a way that conflicts with both EU law and the Swedish preparatory works, which stress that the exception should be interpreted restrictively. A forthcoming precedential judgement from the Supreme Administrative Court that clarifies the legal position would therefore be highly valuable for strengthening legal certainty and enabling lawful, efficient, and predictable use of in-house exemption within the public sector.}},
  author       = {{Meiby, Frida}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Intern upphandling – Tillämpningen av verksamhetskriteriet i svensk och europeisk upphandlingsrätt}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}