Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 June 2003 in Case C-316/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Wien): Eva Glawischnig v Bundesminister für soziale Sicherheit und Generationen (Freedom of access to information — Information relating to the environment — Directive 90/313/EEC — Breaches of the rules on labelling of foodstuffs produced from genetically modified organisms)
Date: 2003-08-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: environmental protection, foodstuff, genetically modified organism, interpretation of the law, labelling

C 184/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2003

Österreichische Autobahnen- und Schnellstraßen- AG (ÖSAG)
— on the interpretation 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 (OJ 1989 L 395, p. 33), as amended by Council
Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordina-
tion of procedures for the award of public service contracts (OJ
1992 L 209, p. 1), and Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June
1993 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply
contracts (OJ 1993 L 199, p. 1) — the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of:
the Chamber,
J.-P. Puissochet, President of
R. Schintgen (Rapporteur), V. Skouris, F. Macken and J.N. Cunha
Rodrigues,
Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet,
Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on
19 June 2003, the operative part of which is as follows:

1.

Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989, on the
coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provi-
sions 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, does not preclude that, in the context of an applica-
tion brought by a tenderer seeking a declaration, for the purpose
of subsequently obtaining damages, that the decision awarding a
public supply contract was unlawful, the review body should, of
its own motion, take account of the unlawfulness of a decision
than the decision being
of
that directive
contested by that
precludes dismissal by the
the application
brought by the tenderer on the ground that, as a result of the
unlawfulness raised ex proprio motu,
the award procedure
was in any event tainted and the tenderer would none the
the
less have been harmed, even in the absence of
unlawfulness alleged by him.

tenderer. On the other hand,

contracting authority other

review body of

the

the award of public

2. Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures
for
supply contracts prohibits a public
contracting authority conducting public supply contract award
procedures from taking account of
references
relating to the products offered by tenderers to other clients not
as proof of
to satisfy an award
criterion.

the tenderers' suitability but

the number of

3. Directive 93/36 precludes,

in the context of a public supply
contract, that the requirement that there should be an opportu-
nity to inspect the subject of the invitation to tender within a
300 kilometre radius of the authority issuing the invitation to
tender should serve as an award criterion.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 12 June 2003

Unabhängiger

in Case C-316/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the
Eva
Glawischnig v Bundesminister für soziale Sicherheit und
Generationen (1)

Verwaltungssenat Wien):

(Freedom of access to information — Information relating to
the environment — Directive 90/313/EEC — Breaches of the
rules on labelling of foodstuffs produced from genetically
modified organisms)

(2003/C 184/18)

(Language of the case: German)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published in
the European Court Reports)

In Case C-316/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Wien (Austria) for a
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Eva Glawischnig and Bundesminister für soziale
Sicherheit und Generationen, on the interpretation of Article 2
(a) of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the
freedom of access to information on the environment
(OJ
1990 L 158, p. 56), the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of:
the Chamber, D.A.O. Edward
M. Wathelet, President of
(Rapporteur), A. La Pergola, P.
Judges;
A. Tizzano, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Admin-
istrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 12 June
2003, in which it has ruled:

Jann and A. Rosas,

is

environment

to information on the

Article 2(a) of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the
freedom of access
to be
interpreted as meaning that the name of the manufacturer and the
product description of
foodstuffs which have been the subject of
administrative measures for controlling compliance with Council Regu-
lation (EC) No 1139/98 of 26 May 1998 concerning the compulsory
indication [in]
certain foodstuffs produced from
genetically modified organisms of particulars other than those provided
for in Directive 79/112/EEC, as amended by Commission Regulation
(EC) No 49/2000 of 10 January 2000, the number of administrative
penalties imposed following those measures, and the producers and
products concerned by such penalties do not constitute information
relating to the environment within the meaning of that provision.

labelling of

the

(1) OJ C 317 of 10.11.2001.

(1) OJ C 303 of 27.10.2001.