CELEX: C2000/102/15
Language: en
Date: 2000-04-08 00:00:00
Title: Case C-513/99: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein Hallinto-oikeus by order of that court of 17 December 1999 in the case of Stagecoach Finland v Helsingin Kaupunki and HKL-Bussiliikenne

C 102/10              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       8.4.2000
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein                          advantageous tender, take into account, in addition to the
Hallinto-oikeus by order of that court of 17 December                        tender price and the quality and environment programme
1999 in the case of Stagecoach Finland v Helsingin                           of the transport operator and various other characteristics
              Kaupunki and HKL-Bussiliikenne                                 of the bus fleet, the low nitric oxide emissions and
                                                                             low noise level of the bus fleet offered by a tendering
                                                                             undertaking, in a manner announced beforehand in the
                        (Case C-513/99)                                      tender notice, such that if the nitric oxide emissions or
                                                                             noise level of the individual buses are below a certain level,
                                                                             extra points for the fleet may be taken into account in the
                        (2000/C 102/15)                                      comparison?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  3. If the answer to the above question is affirmative, an
European Communities by an order of the Korkein Hallin-                      answer is requested to the following question also: Are the
to-oikeus (Supreme Administrative Court), Finland, of                        European Community provisions on public procurement
17 December 1999, which was received at the Court Registry                   to be interpreted as meaning that the awarding of extra
on 28 December 1999, for a preliminary ruling in the case of                 points for the above-mentioned characteristics relating to
Stagecoach Finland v Helsingin Kaupunki and HKL-Bussiliiken-                 nitric oxide emissions and noise level of the fleet is,
ne on the following questions:                                               however, not permitted if it is known beforehand that the
                                                                             department operating bus transport belonging to the city
                                                                             which is the contracting entity is able to offer a bus
1. Are the provisions on the scope of Council Directive                      fleet possessing the above characteristics, which in the
    93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating the procurement                   circumstances only a few undertakings in the sector are
    procedures of entities operating in the water, energy,                   otherwise able to offer?
    transport and telecommunications sectors (OJ 1993 L 199,
    p. 84), in particular Article 2(1)(a), (2)(c) and (4), to be
    interpreted as meaning that that directive applies to a
    procedure of a city which is a contracting entity for the
    award of a contract concerning the operation of bus
    transport within the city, if
    — the city is responsible for the planning, development,
        implementation and other arrangement and super-                 Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein
        vision of public transport in its area,                         Hallinto-oikeus by order of that court of 31 December
                                                                        1999 in the proceedings brought by Palin Granit Oy and
    — for the above functions the city has a public transport           Vehmassalon Kansanterveystyön Kuntayhtymän Hallitus
        committee and a city transport department subordinate
        thereto,
                                                                                                     (Case C-9/00)
    — within the city transport department there is a planning
                                                                                                   (2000/C 102/16)
        unit which acts as an ordering unit which prepares
        proposals for the public transport committee on which
        routes should be put out to tender and what level of            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
        quality of services should be required, and                     European Communities by an order of the Korkein Hallin-
                                                                        to-oikeus (Supreme Administrative Court), Finland, of 31
    — within the city transport department there are pro-               December 1999, which was received at the Court Registry on
        duction units, economically distinct from the rest of           13 January 2000, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
        the transport department, including a unit which                brought by Palin Granit Oy and Vehmassalon Kansanterveys-
        provides bus transport services and takes part in tender        työn Kuntayhtymän Hallitus on the following questions:
        procedures relating thereto?
                                                                        Is leftover stone resulting from stone quarrying to be regarded
2. Are the European Community provisions on public pro-                 as waste within the meaning of Article 1(a) of Council Directive
    curement, in particular Article 36(1) of Council Directive          75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (1), as amended by
    92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination              Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991(2), having
    of procedures for the award of public service contracts (OJ         regard to points (a) to (d) below?
    1992 L 209, p. 1) or the equivalent Article 34(1) of
    Directive 93/38/EEC, to be interpreted as meaning that,             (a) What relevance, in deciding the above question, does it
    when organising a tender procedure concerning the oper-                  have that the leftover stone is stored on a site adjoining
    ation of bus transport within the city, a city which is a                the place of quarrying to await subsequent use? Is it
    contracting entity may, among the criteria for awarding                  relevant generally whether it is stored on the quarrying
    the contract on the basis of the economically most                       site, a site next to it or further away?