French Republic v European Commission.
Date: 2013-09-26
44. Since that concept is not defined in Directive 93/37, it must, in the absence of reference to the law of the Member States, be given an autonomous and uniform interpretation, taking into account the context of and the objective pursued by the provision in which it appears (see, to this effect, Case C‑376/11 Pie Optiek  [2012] ECR I-0000, paragraph 33 and the case-law cited).
51. Given that it is clear from settled case-law that the Court has jurisdiction to review such a legal classification (see, inter alia, Case C-136/92 P Commission  v Brazzelli Lualdi and Others  [1994] ECR I‑1981, paragraph 49), it must be concluded that this part of the first plea is admissible.
59. As regards review of the distortion which the French Republic claims to be present in the General Court’s finding, in paragraph 43 of the judgment under appeal, that the Commission analysed whether Article 2(2) of Directive 93/37 was applicable by examining, in the decision at issue, the project consisting in a complete renovation of the Les Boucaniers complex and that that examination was based not on the works undertaken but on the complex’s overall purpose, it is to be pointed out that, in accordance with the Court of Justice’s settled case-law, distortion must be obvious from the documents on the Court’s file, without there being any need to carry out a new assessment of the facts and the evidence (see, inter alia, Case C‑551/03 P General Motors  v Commission  [2006] ECR I‑3173, paragraph 54).
60. Even though it is possible to interpret the decision at issue in the manner argued for by the French Republic, the different interpretation adopted by the General Court does not reveal any distortion of its content (see, to this effect, Case C‑260/09 P Activision Blizzard Germany  v Commission  [2011] ECR I‑419, paragraph 54).
69. According to the French Republic, the term ‘works contracts’ within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 93/37 must be interpreted in the light of the term ‘public works contracts’, a concept which requires that such a contract be performed in the contracting authority’s direct economic interest (Case C-451/08 Helmut Müller  [2010] ECR I‑2673, paragraphs 50 to 52). The French Republic explains that the contract relating to the renovation of the Les Boucaniers complex cannot be regarded as being of such direct economic interest solely because the renovation plays a part in the economic and tourism development of Martinique. It considers that Article 2 of the directive covers only works contracts which, if concluded by a contracting authority, would be public works contracts within the meaning of Article 1(a) of the directive.
71. So far as concerns the Commission’s contention that the first part of the third plea is inadmissible, it is settled case-law that to allow a party to put forward for the first time before the Court of Justice a plea in law which it has not raised before the General Court would be to authorise it to bring before the Court of Justice, whose jurisdiction in appeals is limited, a case of wider ambit than that which came before the General Court and that in an appeal the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice is confined to review of the findings of law on the pleas argued before the General Court (Case C-266/05 P Sison  v Council [2007] ECR I‑1233, paragraph 95 and the case-law cited).