# C_2009069EN.01002103.xml

| 21.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/21 |
| --------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | ------- |

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Assen (Netherlands) lodged on 22 December 2008 — 1. Combinatie Spijker Infrabouw/De Jonge Konstruktie; 2. Van Spijker Infrabouw B.V.; 3. De Jonge Konstruktie B.V. v Provincie Drenthe

(Case C-568/08)

(2009/C 69/39)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Assen

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants:

| 1. | Combinatie Spijker Infrabouw/De Jonge Konstruktie |
| -- | ------------------------------------------------- |

| 2. | Van Spijker Infrabouw B.V. |
| -- | -------------------------- |

| 3. | De Jonge Konstruktie B.V. |
| -- | ------------------------- |

Defendant: Provincie Drenthe

Questions referred

| 1 | (a)
Must Article 1(1) and (3) and Article 2(1) and (6) of Directive 89/665/EEC( 1 ) be interpreted as meaning that they have not been complied with if the legal protection to be afforded by national courts in disputes relating to tendering procedures governed by European law is impeded by the fact that conflicting decisions may arise under a system in which both administrative courts and civil courts may have jurisdiction with respect to the same decision and its consequences? (b)
Is it permissible in this context for the administrative courts to be confined to forming an opinion and ruling on the tendering decision, and if so, why and/or under what conditions? (c)
Is it permissible in this context for the Algemene wet bestuursrecht (Netherlands General Law on Administrative Law), which, as a rule, governs applications for access to the administrative courts, to exclude such applications in the case of decisions concerning the conclusion of a contract by the contracting authority with one of the tenderers, and if so, why and/or under what conditions? (d)
Is the answer to Question 2 of relevance in this context? | (a) | Must Article 1(1) and (3) and Article 2(1) and (6) of Directive 89/665/EEC( 1 ) be interpreted as meaning that they have not been complied with if the legal protection to be afforded by national courts in disputes relating to tendering procedures governed by European law is impeded by the fact that conflicting decisions may arise under a system in which both administrative courts and civil courts may have jurisdiction with respect to the same decision and its consequences? | (b) | Is it permissible in this context for the administrative courts to be confined to forming an opinion and ruling on the tendering decision, and if so, why and/or under what conditions? | (c) | Is it permissible in this context for the Algemene wet bestuursrecht (Netherlands General Law on Administrative Law), which, as a rule, governs applications for access to the administrative courts, to exclude such applications in the case of decisions concerning the conclusion of a contract by the contracting authority with one of the tenderers, and if so, why and/or under what conditions? | (d) | Is the answer to Question 2 of relevance in this context? |
| --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------------------- |
| (a) | Must Article 1(1) and (3) and Article 2(1) and (6) of Directive 89/665/EEC( 1 ) be interpreted as meaning that they have not been complied with if the legal protection to be afforded by national courts in disputes relating to tendering procedures governed by European law is impeded by the fact that conflicting decisions may arise under a system in which both administrative courts and civil courts may have jurisdiction with respect to the same decision and its consequences? | | | | | | | | |
| (b) | Is it permissible in this context for the administrative courts to be confined to forming an opinion and ruling on the tendering decision, and if so, why and/or under what conditions? | | | | | | | | |
| (c) | Is it permissible in this context for the Algemene wet bestuursrecht (Netherlands General Law on Administrative Law), which, as a rule, governs applications for access to the administrative courts, to exclude such applications in the case of decisions concerning the conclusion of a contract by the contracting authority with one of the tenderers, and if so, why and/or under what conditions? | | | | | | | | |
| (d) | Is the answer to Question 2 of relevance in this context? | | | | | | | | |

| 2 | (a)
Must Article 1(1) and (3) and Article 2(1) and (6) of Directive 89/665/EEC be interpreted as meaning that they have not been complied with if the only procedure for obtaining a rapid decision is characterised by the fact that it is in principle geared to a rapid mandatory measure, that lawyers have no right to exchange views, that [no] evidence is, as a rule, presented in other than written form and that statutory rules on evidence are not applicable? (b)
If not, does this also apply if the decision does not lead to the final determination of the legal situation and does not form part of a decision-making process leading to such a final decision? (c)
Does it make a difference in this context if the decision is binding only on the parties to the proceedings, even though other parties may have an interest? | (a) | Must Article 1(1) and (3) and Article 2(1) and (6) of Directive 89/665/EEC be interpreted as meaning that they have not been complied with if the only procedure for obtaining a rapid decision is characterised by the fact that it is in principle geared to a rapid mandatory measure, that lawyers have no right to exchange views, that [no] evidence is, as a rule, presented in other than written form and that statutory rules on evidence are not applicable? | (b) | If not, does this also apply if the decision does not lead to the final determination of the legal situation and does not form part of a decision-making process leading to such a final decision? | (c) | Does it make a difference in this context if the decision is binding only on the parties to the proceedings, even though other parties may have an interest? |
| --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| (a) | Must Article 1(1) and (3) and Article 2(1) and (6) of Directive 89/665/EEC be interpreted as meaning that they have not been complied with if the only procedure for obtaining a rapid decision is characterised by the fact that it is in principle geared to a rapid mandatory measure, that lawyers have no right to exchange views, that [no] evidence is, as a rule, presented in other than written form and that statutory rules on evidence are not applicable? | | | | | | |
| (b) | If not, does this also apply if the decision does not lead to the final determination of the legal situation and does not form part of a decision-making process leading to such a final decision? | | | | | | |
| (c) | Does it make a difference in this context if the decision is binding only on the parties to the proceedings, even though other parties may have an interest? | | | | | | |

| 3. | Is it compatible with Directive 89/665/EEC for a court, in interim relief proceedings, to order the contracting public authority to take a tendering decision which is subsequently deemed, in proceedings on the substance, to be contrary to tendering rules under European law? |
| -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

| 4. | (a)
If the answer to the previous question is in the negative, must the contracting public authority be deemed liable in that regard, and if so, in what sense? (b)
Does the same apply if the answer to that question is in the affirmative? (c)
If that authority is required to pay damages, does Community law set criteria for determining and estimating those damages, and if so, what are they? (d)
If the contracting public authority cannot be deemed liable, is it possible, under Community law, for some other person to be shown to be liable, and on what basis? | (a) | If the answer to the previous question is in the negative, must the contracting public authority be deemed liable in that regard, and if so, in what sense? | (b) | Does the same apply if the answer to that question is in the affirmative? | (c) | If that authority is required to pay damages, does Community law set criteria for determining and estimating those damages, and if so, what are they? | (d) | If the contracting public authority cannot be deemed liable, is it possible, under Community law, for some other person to be shown to be liable, and on what basis? |
| --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| (a) | If the answer to the previous question is in the negative, must the contracting public authority be deemed liable in that regard, and if so, in what sense? | | | | | | | | |
| (b) | Does the same apply if the answer to that question is in the affirmative? | | | | | | | | |
| (c) | If that authority is required to pay damages, does Community law set criteria for determining and estimating those damages, and if so, what are they? | | | | | | | | |
| (d) | If the contracting public authority cannot be deemed liable, is it possible, under Community law, for some other person to be shown to be liable, and on what basis? | | | | | | | | |

| 5. | If it in fact appears to be impossible, or extremely difficult, under national law and/or with the aid of the answers to the above questions to attribute liability, what must the national court do? |
| -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

---

( 1 )  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 (OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33).

---