|
5.3.2005 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 57/6 |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(First Chamber)
of 11 January 2005
in Case C-26/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Naumburg): Stadt Halle, RPL Recyclingpark Lochau GmbH v Arbeitsgemeinschaft Thermische Restabfall- und Energieverwertungsanlage TREA Leuna (1)
(Directive 92/50/EEC - Public service contracts - Award with no public call for tenders - Award of the contract to a semi-public undertaking - Judicial protection - Directive 89/665/EEC)
(2005/C 57/10)
Language of the case: German
In Case C-26/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Oberlandesgericht Naumburg (Higher Regional Court, Naumburg, Germany), made by decision of 8 January 2003, received at the Court on 23 January 2003, in the proceedings between Stadt Halle, RPL Recyclingpark Lochau GmbH and Arbeitsgemeinschaft Thermische Restabfall- und Energieverwertungsanlage TREA Leuna — the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, E. Juhász (Rapporteur), M. Ilešič and E. Levits, Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 11 January 2005, in which it has ruled:
|
1. |
Article 1(1) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, itself amended by European Parliament and Council Directive 97/52/EC of 13 October 1997, must be interpreted as meaning that the obligation of the Member States to ensure that effective and rapid remedies are available against decisions taken by contracting authorities extends also to decisions taken outside a formal award procedure and decisions prior to a formal call for tenders, in particular the decision on whether a particular contract falls within the personal and material scope of Directive 92/50, as amended. That possibility of review is available to any person having or having had an interest in obtaining the contract in question who has been or risks being harmed by an alleged infringement, from the time when the contracting authority has expressed its will in a manner capable of producing legal effects. The Member States are not therefore authorised to make the possibility of review subject to the fact that the public procurement procedure in question has formally reached a particular stage. |
|
2. |
Where a contracting authority intends to conclude a contract for pecuniary interest relating to services within the material scope of Directive 92/50, as amended by Directive 97/52, with a company legally distinct from it, in whose capital it has a holding together with one or more private undertakings, the public award procedures laid down by that directive must always be applied. |