Klaipėdos regiono atlieku tvarkymo centras (Public procurement - Selection of participants - Judgment) [2021] EUECJ C-927/19 (07 September 2021)

Klaipėdos regiono atlieku tvarkymo centras (Public procurement - Selection of participants - Judgment) [2021] EUECJ C-927/19 (07 September 2021)

The referring court seeks interpretation of EU law to determine whether qualification requirements regarding turnover and technical capacity are selection criteria or technical specifications, the extent to which confidential information must be disclosed to unsuccessful tenderers in review procedures, and whether decisions to withhold such information are separately challengeable. The balance between confidentiality and effective judicial protection is central, as is the responsibility for false information in joint tenders.

Citation
[2021] EUECJ C-927/19
Parties
Contracting Authority: Klaipėdos regiono atliekų tvarkymo centras UAB; Applicant/complainant: Ecoservice Klaipėda UAB; Member of Consortium (successful Tenderer): Klaipėdos autobusų parkas UAB; Member of Consortium (successful Tenderer): Parsekas UAB; Member of Consortium (successful Tenderer): Klaipėdos transportas UAB
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
07 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (reference for Interpretation of EU Law) / Referral to Court of Justice of the European Union From Supreme Court of Lithuania
Outcome
Reference for a preliminary ruling; questions referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union for interpretation of EU law.
Legal Topics
Confidentiality in Procurement, Access to Information, Review Procedures, Trade Secrets, Qualification Criteria, Judicial Protection
EU Law Public Procurement Administrative Law Confidentiality in Procurement Access to Information Review Procedures Trade Secrets Qualification Criteria +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Klaipėdos regiono atliekų tvarkymo centras UAB

Contracting Authority

Ecoservice Klaipėda UAB

Applicant/complainant

Klaipėdos autobusų parkas UAB

Member of Consortium (successful Tenderer)

Parsekas UAB

Member of Consortium (successful Tenderer)

Klaipėdos transportas UAB

Member of Consortium (successful Tenderer)

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (reference for Interpretation of EU Law) / Referral to Court of Justice of the European Union From Supreme Court of Lithuania

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain qualification requirements are technical specifications or selection criteria under Directive 2014/24/EU
  2. 2 Scope of access to confidential information in procurement disputes under EU law
  3. 3 Obligations of contracting authorities regarding disclosure and protection of trade secrets

Ratio Decidendi

The referring court seeks interpretation of EU law to determine whether qualification requirements regarding turnover and technical capacity are selection criteria or technical specifications, the extent to which confidential information must be disclosed to unsuccessful tenderers in review procedures, and whether decisions to withhold such information are separately challengeable. The balance between confidentiality and effective judicial protection is central, as is the responsibility for false information in joint tenders.

Court Disposition

Reference for a preliminary ruling; questions referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union for interpretation of EU law.