‘Optional’ Exclusion from Public Tenders Grounded on Conflicts of Interests and Principle of Proportionality: Whose Choice?

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW European Public Law Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI:10.54648/euro2020060
Javier Mirando Díaz
{"title":"‘Optional’ Exclusion from Public Tenders Grounded on Conflicts of Interests and Principle of Proportionality: Whose Choice?","authors":"Javier Mirando Díaz","doi":"10.54648/euro2020060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Focusing on the current regulation of conflicts of interest in public procurement by Directive 2014/24/EU we try to answer two main questions: (1) what is the core content of its regulation and which implications does it have in daily public procurement activity; and (2) whether this core content and the way it is materialized in Directive 2014/24/EU leaves any leeway to Member States law to modify or create new conflict of interests provisions. The first part of the article is devoted to the analysis of the ‘conflict of interest’ concept under the procurement Directive, concluding that it rests on three fundamental pillars: (a) a broad and functional subjective application based on the objective nature of the phenomenon; (b) a transfer of power (and responsibility) to the contracting entities; and (c) the strong relevance of the principle of proportionality. This new concept of conflict of interest at EU level and the recent CJEU case law in the field suggest a reduction of Member States’ deference in the transposition of optional exclusion grounds. In the present article, the case of Spain is used as an example to illustrate how the interpretative implications of the current EU framework do not leave virtually any margin to Member States to adapt the conflict of interests provisions to national legal traditions.\npublic procurement law, administrative law, EU law, public law, conflicts of interests, causes of exclusion, integrity, anti-corruption","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Focusing on the current regulation of conflicts of interest in public procurement by Directive 2014/24/EU we try to answer two main questions: (1) what is the core content of its regulation and which implications does it have in daily public procurement activity; and (2) whether this core content and the way it is materialized in Directive 2014/24/EU leaves any leeway to Member States law to modify or create new conflict of interests provisions. The first part of the article is devoted to the analysis of the ‘conflict of interest’ concept under the procurement Directive, concluding that it rests on three fundamental pillars: (a) a broad and functional subjective application based on the objective nature of the phenomenon; (b) a transfer of power (and responsibility) to the contracting entities; and (c) the strong relevance of the principle of proportionality. This new concept of conflict of interest at EU level and the recent CJEU case law in the field suggest a reduction of Member States’ deference in the transposition of optional exclusion grounds. In the present article, the case of Spain is used as an example to illustrate how the interpretative implications of the current EU framework do not leave virtually any margin to Member States to adapt the conflict of interests provisions to national legal traditions. public procurement law, administrative law, EU law, public law, conflicts of interests, causes of exclusion, integrity, anti-corruption
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于利益冲突和比例原则的招标“选择性”排除:谁的选择?
针对目前欧盟第2014/24/EU号指令对公共采购利益冲突的监管,我们试图回答两个主要问题:(1)其监管的核心内容是什么,它在日常公共采购活动中有哪些影响;以及(2)这一核心内容及其在2014/24/EU指令中的具体化方式是否为成员国法律修改或创建新的利益冲突条款留下了任何余地。文章的第一部分专门分析了《采购指令》中的“利益冲突”概念,得出的结论是,它基于三个基本支柱:(a)基于现象的客观性质的广泛和实用的主观应用;(b) 将权力(和责任)移交给签约实体;以及(c)相称性原则的强烈相关性。欧盟层面利益冲突的这一新概念以及欧盟法院最近在该领域的判例法表明,成员国在转换可选排除理由方面的尊重有所减少。在本文中,以西班牙为例,说明当前欧盟框架的解释性含义实际上没有给成员国留下任何余地,使利益冲突条款适应国家法律传统。公共采购法、行政法、欧盟法律、公法、利益冲突、排他原因、完整性、,反腐败
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
9
期刊最新文献
‘Respect for Religious Feelings’: As the Italian Case Shows, Fresh Paint Can’t Fix the Crumbling Wall of Blasphemy The ‘Then’ and the ‘Now’ of Forced Relocation of Indigenous Peoples: Repercussions in International Law, Torts and Beyond Subsidiarity v. Autonomy in the EU Book Review: Federalism and Constitutional Law: The Italian Contribution to Comparative Regionalism, Erika Arban, Giuseppe Martinico & Francesco Palermo (eds). London and New York: Routledge. 2021 The Tragic Choices During the Global Health Emergency: Comparative Economic Law Reflections
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1