natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As the Advocate General stated at point 103 of his Opinion, by requiring undertakings performing public works contracts and, indirectly, their subcontractors to apply the minimum wage laid down by the ‘Buildings and public works’ collective agreement, a law such as the Landesvergabegesetz may impose on service providers established in another Member State where minimum rates of pay are lower an additional economic burden that may prohibit, impede or render less attractive the provision of
Kot opozarja generalni pravobranilec v točki 103 sklepnih predlogov, lahko zakonodaja, kot je deželni zakon, s tem da izbranim ponudnikom za izvedbo javnih naročil gradnje in, posredno, njihovim podizvajalcem nalaga, naj izplačujejo najmanj tak�no plačo, kot je določena v kolektivni pogodbi za gradnjo in javna dela, ponudnikom storitev s sedežem v drugi državi članici, kjer so minimalne plače nižje, nalaga dodatne ekonomske stro�ke, ki lahko prepovejo, ovirajo ali zmanj�ajo privlačnost
2008 — CASE C-346/06 their services in the host Member State.
2008 – ZADEVA C-346/06 izvajanja njihovih storitev v državi gostiteljici.
Therefore, a measure such as that at issue in the main proceedings is capable of constituting a restriction within the meaning of Article 49 EC.
Zato lahko ukrep, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, pomeni omejitev v smislu člena 49 ES.
In addition, contrary to the contentions of Land Niedersachsen and a number of the Governments which submitted observations to the Court, such a measure cannot be considered to be justified by the objective of ensuring the protection of workers.
Poleg tega v nasprotju s tem, kar zatrjujejo Land Niedersachsen in nekatere izmed vlad, ki so Sodi�ču predložile stali�ča, takega ukrepa ni mogoče upravičiti s ciljem za�čite delavcev.
As stated at paragraph 29 of this judgment, since this case concerns the rate of pay fixed by a collective agreement such as that at issue in the main proceedings, that rate is applicable, as a result of a law such as the Landesvergabegesetz, only to a part of the construction sector falling within the geographical area of that agreement, since, first, that legislation applies solely to public contracts and not to private contracts and, second, that collective agreement has not been declared universally applicable.
Kot je bilo namreč ugotovljeno v točki 29 te sodbe, urna postavka, določena s kolektivno pogodbo, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, ki učinkuje na podlagi zakonodaje, kot je deželni zakon, zavezuje le del sektorja gradnje, ker se navedena zakonodaja nana�a le na javna, ne pa tudi na zasebna naročila in ker navedena kolektivna pogodba ni bila razgla�ena za splo�no veljavno.
The case-file submitted to the Court contains no evidence to support the conclusion that the protection resulting from such a rate of pay — which, moreover, as the national court also notes, exceeds the minimum rate of pay applicable pursuant to the AEntG — is necessary for a construction sector worker only when he is employed in the context of a public works contract but not when he is employed in the context of a private contract.
Vendar spis, ki je bil predložen Sodi�ču, ne vsebuje nobenih navedb, iz katerih bi lahko sklepali, da je za�čita, ki izhaja iz take urne postavke, ki sicer – kot poudarja tudi predložitveno sodi�če – presega minimalno urno postavko, veljavno na podlagi AEntG, za delavca v sektorju gradnje nujna le, če je zaposlen v okviru javnega naročila za gradnje, ne pa tudi če dela v okviru zasebnega naročila.
For the same reasons as those set out at paragraphs 39 and 40 of this judgment, the restriction also cannot be considered to be justified by the objective of ensuring protection for independence in the organisation of working life by trade unions, as the German Government contends.
Navedene omejitve iz istih razlogov, kot so navedeni v točkah 39 in 40 te sodbe, tudi ni mogoče upravičiti s ciljem za�čite neodvisne organizacije poklicnega življenja, ki jo zagotavljajo sindikati, na kar se sklicuje nem�ka vlada.
Lastly, with regard to the objective of ensuring the financial balance of the social security systems, also raised by the German Government in support of its contention that the effectiveness of the social security system depends on the level of workers’ salaries, it does not appear from the case-file submitted to the Court that a measure such as that at issue in the main proceedings is necessary in order to avoid the risk of seriously undermining the financial balance of the social security system, an objective which the Court has recognised cannot be ruled out as a potential overriding reason in the general interest (see, inter alia, Case C-372/04 Watts [2006] ECR I-4325, paragraph 103 and the caselaw cited).
Nazadnje v zvezi s ciljem finančne stabilnosti sistemov socialne varnosti, na katerega se z zatrjevanjem, da je učinkovitost sistema socialne varnosti odvisna od vi�ine plač delavcev, prav tako sklicuje nem�ka vlada, iz Sodi�ču predloženega spisa ne izhaja, da bi bil ukrep, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, nujen za dosego cilja preprečitve nevarnosti resnega poru�enja finančnega ravnovesja sistema socialne varnosti, za katerega je Sodi�če že presodilo, da je lahko nujen razlog v javnem interesu (glej zlasti sodbo z dne 16. maja 2006 v zadevi Watts, C-372/04, ZOdl., str. I-4325, točka 103 in navedena sodna praksa).
Having regard to all of the foregoing, the answer to the question referred must be that Directive 96/71, interpreted in the light of Article 49 EC, precludes an authority of a Member State, in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, from adopting a measure of a legislative nature requiring the contracting authority to designate as contractors for public works contracts only those undertakings which, when submitting their tenders, agree in writing to pay their employees, in return for performance of the services concerned, at least the remuneration prescribed by the collective agreement in force at the place where those services are performed.
Glede na celoto zgoraj navedenih ugotovitev je treba na zastavljeno vpra�anje odgovoriti, da Direktiva 96/71 v skladu z razlago z vidika člena 49 ES v primeru, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, nasprotuje zakonskemu ukrepu, s katerim organ države članice naročniku predpi�e, da lahko za izvedbo javnih naročil za gradnje izbere le podjetja, ki se ob oddaji ponudbe pisno zavežejo, da bodo svojim delavcem za izvajanje zadevnih storitev izplačevala najmanj tak�no plačo, kot je določena v veljavni kolektivni pogodbi v kraju, kjer se te storitve izvajajo.
Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, interpreted in the light of Article 49 EC, precludes an authority of a Member State, in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, from adopting a measure of a legislative nature requiring the contracting authority to designate as contractors for public works contracts only those undertakings which, when submitting their tenders, agree in writing to pay their employees, in return for performance of the services concerned, at least the remuneration prescribed by the collective agreement the minimum wage in force at the place where those services are performed.
Direktiva Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta 96/71/ES z dne 16. decembra 1996 o napotitvi delavcev na delo v okviru opravljanja storitev v skladu z razlago z vidika člena 49 ES v primeru, kot je ta v postopku v glavni stvari, nasprotuje zakonskemu ukrepu, s katerim organ države članice naročniku predpiše, da lahko za izvedbo javnih naročil za gradnje izbere le podjetja, ki se ob oddaji ponudbe pisno zavežejo, da bodo svojim delavcem za izvajanje zadevnih storitev izplačevala najmanj takšno plačo, kot je določena v veljavni kolektivni pogodbi v kraju, kjer se te storitve izvajajo.
Case C-444/06
Zadeva C-444/06
(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 89/665/EEC — Public supply and works contracts — Review procedures for the award of public contracts)
„Neizpolnitev obveznosti države – Direktiva 89/665/EGS – Javna naročila za preskrbo in javna naročila za gradnje – Revizijski postopek na področju oddaje javnih naročil“
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 3 April 2008 . . . . . . . . . . .
Sodba Sodi�ča (drugi senat) z dne 3. aprila 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Approximation of laws — Review procedures in respect of the award of public supply and public works contracts — Directive 89/665 — Member States under an obligation to provide for review procedures in respect of decisions awarding contracts
Približevanje zakonodaj – Revizijski postopek na področju oddaje javnih naročil za preskrbo in gradnje – Direktiva 89/665 – Obveznost držav članic, da določijo revizijski postopek zoper odločbe o oddaji javnega naročila
(Council Directive 89/665, Arts 2(1)(a) and (b), and 6, second para.)
(Direktiva Sveta 89/665, člena 2(1)(a) in (b), in 6, drugi odstavek)
SUMMARY — CASE C-444/06
POVZETEK – ZADEVA C-444/06
A Member State fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 2(1)(a) and (b) of Council Directive 89/665 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, as amended by Directive 92/50, where its legislation fails to provide for a mandatory period for the contracting authority to notify the decision on the award of a contract to all the tenderers or to provide for a mandatory waiting period between the award of the contract and its conclusion.
Država članica, ki za naročnika niti ne določi obveznega roka za vročitev odločbe o oddaji javnega naročila vsem ponudnikom niti ne določi roka, ki mora preteči med oddajo javnega naročila in sklenitvijo pogodbe, ne izpolnjuje obveznosti iz člena 2(1)(a) in (b) Direktive 89/665 o usklajevanju zakonov in drugih predpisov o uporabi revizijskih postopkov oddaje javnih naročil za preskrbo in javnih naročil za gradnje, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 92/50.
the conclusion of the contract pursuant to Article 2(1) of the directive presupposes, in particular, the duty to inform the tenderers of the award decision before the conclusion of the contract so that they may have a real possibility of initiating review proceedings.
sklenjene pogodbe. Poleg tega iz popolnega pravnega varstva, ki ga je treba zagotoviti tudi pred sklenitvijo pogodbe, ob uporabi člena 2(1) navedene direktive zlasti izhaja obveznost vročitve odločbe o izbiri ponudnikom pred sklenitvijo pogodbe, da bi imeli resnično možnost zahtevanja revizije.
That same protection requires provision to be made for the unsuccessful tenderer to examine in sufficient time the question of whether the decision to award is valid.
V skladu s tem istim varstvom je treba predvideti možnost, da lahko neizbrani ponudnik v ustreznem času preuči veljavnost odločbe o oddaji javnega naročila.
In the light of the need to guarantee the effectiveness of Directive 89/665, the objective of which is to ensure that unlawful decisions taken by the contracting authorities may be reviewed effectively and as rapidly as possible, it follows that a reasonable period must pass between the moment when the award decision is communicated to the unsuccessful tenderers and the conclusion of the contract in order to allow them, inter alia, to bring an application for interim measures until the conclusion of the contract.
Ob upo�tevanju zahtev po polnem učinkovanju Direktive 89/665, katere namen je zagotoviti, da se lahko nezakonite odločitve, ki jih sprejmejo naročniki, učinkovito in čim hitreje preizkusijo, je treba omogočiti razumen rok med trenutkom vročitve odločbe o oddaji javnega naročila neizbranim ponudnikom in sklenitvijo pogodbe, da bi zlasti omogočili vlaganje zahtev za začasne ukrepe, ki bodo veljali do navedene sklenitve.
The combined provisions of Article 2(1)(a) and (b) and the second subparagraph of Article 2(6) of Directive 89/665 are to be interpreted as meaning that the Member States are required to ensure that the contracting authority’s decision prior to the conclusion of the contract as to the bidder in a tender procedure with which it will conclude the contract is in all cases open to review in a procedure whereby an applicant may have that decision set aside if the relevant conditions are met, notwithstanding the possibility, once the contract has been concluded, of obtaining an award of damages. Moreover, the complete legal protection which must accordingly be ensured before
Člen 2(1)(a) in (b) v povezavi z odstavkom 6, drugi pododstavek, Direktive 89/665 je treba namreč razlagati tako, da morajo države članice v zvezi z odločbo naročnika pred sklenitvijo pogodbe, s katero naročnik izbere ponudnika, udeleženega v postopku javnega naročila, in s katero sklene pogodbo, za vsak primer določiti revizijski postopek, ki bo vlagatelju zahtevka omogočal, da zahteva razglasitev ničnosti te odločbe, če bo izpolnjeval potrebne pogoje, ne glede na to, da je upravičen do od�kodnine zaradi
(see paras 37-39, 44, 58, operative part 1)
(Glej točke od 37 do 39, 44, 58 in točko 1 izreka.)
In Case C-444/06,
V zadevi C-444/06, zaradi tožbe zaradi neizpolnitve obveznosti na podlagi člena 226 ES, vložene 26. oktobra 2006,
Commission of the European Communities, represented by X. Lewis, acting as Agent, assisted by C. Fernandez Vicién and I. Moreno-Tapia Rivas, abogados, with an address for service in Luxembourg, applicant, v
Moreno-Tapio Rivasom, odvetnika, z naslovom za vročanje v Luxembourgu, tožeča stranka, proti
Kingdom of Spain, represented by F. Díez Moreno, acting as Agent, with an address for service in Luxembourg, defendant,
Kraljevini Španiji, ki jo zastopa F. Díez Moreno, zastopnik, z naslovom za vročanje v Luxembourgu, tožena stranka,
2008 — CASE C-444/06
2008 – ZADEVA C-444/06
By its application, the Commission of the European Communities asks the Court of Justice to declare that, by failing to provide for a mandatory period for the contracting authority to notify the decision on the award of a contract to all the tenderers, by failing to provide for a mandatory waiting period between the award of the contract and its conclusion and by allowing an annulled contract to continue to have legal effects, the Kingdom of Spain failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 2(1)(a) and
Komisija Evropskih skupnosti s tožbo predlaga Sodi�ču, naj ugotovi, da Kraljevina Španija, s tem da za naročnika ni določila obveznega roka za vročitev odločbe o oddaji javnega naročila vsem ponudnikom, da ni določila roka, ki mora preteči med oddajo javnega naročila in sklenitvijo pogodbe, ter da je dopustila, da ima razveljavljena pogodba o javnem naročilu �e vedno pravne učinke, ni izpolnila obveznosti iz člena 2(1)(a) in (b) Direktive Sveta 89/665/EGS z dne 21. decembra 1989 o usklajevanju zakonov in drugih predpisov o uporabi revizijskih postopkov oddaje javnih
COMMISSION v SPAIN
KOMISIJA PROTI ŠPANIJI naročil za preskrbo in javnih naročil za gradnje (UL L 395, str.
33), as amended by Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 (OJ 1992 L 209, p.
33), kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo Sveta 92/50/EGS z dne 18. junija 1992 (UL L 209, str.
1, ‘the review directive’).
1, v nadaljevanju: direktiva o reviziji).
Article 1 of the review directive is worded as follows:
V členu 1 direktive o reviziji je določeno:
The Member States shall ensure that the review procedures are available, under detailed rules which the Member States may establish, at least to any person having
Države članice zagotovijo, da so na voljo revizijski postopki v skladu s podrobnimi predpisi, ki jih države članice lahko sprejmejo, vsaj za vsako osebo, ki ima ali je imela
2008 — CASE C-444/06 or having had an interest in obtaining a particular public supply or public works contract and who has been or risks being harmed by an alleged infringement.
2008 – ZADEVA C-444/06 interes, da bi dobila določeno javno naročilo v zvezi s preskrbo ali javno naročilo za gradnje, in ki je bila o�kodovana ali pa ji grozi o�kodovanje zaradi domnevne kr�itve.
In particular, the Member States may require that the person seeking the review must have previously notified the contracting authority of the alleged infringement and of his intention to seek review.’
Države članice lahko zlasti zahtevajo, da mora oseba, ki zahteva revizijo, naročnika predhodno obvestiti o domnevni kr�itvi in svoji nameri, da bo zahtevala revizijo.“
Article 2(1) of that directive states:
V členu 2(1) navedene direktive je določeno:
(a) take, at the earliest opportunity and by way of interlocutory procedures, interim measures with the aim of correcting the alleged infringement or preventing further damage to the interests concerned, including measures to suspend or to ensure the suspension of the procedure for the award of a public contract or the implementation of any decision taken by the contracting authority;
(a) se ob prvi priložnosti in z začasnimi postopki sprejmejo začasni ukrepi, katerih cilj je, da se popravijo domnevne kr�itve ali prepreči nadaljnja �koda zainteresiranim ponudnikom, vključno z ukrepi, s katerimi se začasno prekine ali zagotovi začasna prekinitev postopka oddaje javnih naročil ali izvajanje katere koli odločitve, ki jo sprejme naročnik;
(b) either set aside or ensure the setting aside of decisions taken unlawfully, including the removal of discriminatory technical, economic or financial specifications in the invitation to tender, the contract documents or in any other document relating to the contract award procedure;
(b) se razveljavi ali zagotovi, da se razveljavijo nezakonito sprejete odločitve, vključno z odpravo diskriminacijskih tehničnih, ekonomskih ali finančnih specifikacij v razpisu, razpisni dokumentaciji ali v katerih koli drugih dokumentih, ki se nana�ajo na postopek oddaje javnega naročila;
(c) award damages to persons harmed by an infringement.’
(c) se povrne �koda osebam, ki so bile o�kodovane zaradi kr�itve.“
Article 2(6) of the review directive states:
V členu 2(6) direktive o reviziji je določeno:
‘The effects of the exercise of the powers referred to in paragraph 1 on a contract concluded subsequent to its award shall be determined by national law.
„Učinke izvajanja pooblastil, navedenih v odstavku 1, na pogodbo, ki se sklene po oddaji, določi nacionalna zakonodaja.
Furthermore, except where a decision must be set aside prior to the award of damages, a Member State may provide that, after the conclusion of a contract following its award, the powers of the body responsible for the review procedures shall be limited to awarding damages to any person harmed by an infringement.’
Poleg tega lahko država članica določi, razen ko je treba odločitev pred določitvijo od�kodnine razveljaviti, da se pooblastila organa, ki je odgovoren za revizijske postopke, po sklenitvi pogodbe o oddaji javnega naročila omejijo na določanje od�kodnine osebi, o�kodovani zaradi kr�itve.“
21775), as amended by Law No 62/2003 on Fiscal, Administrative and Social Measures (ley 62/2003, de medidas fiscales, administrativas y del orden social) of 30 December 2003 (BOE No 313 of 31 December 2003, p.
21775), kot je bil spremenjen z zakonom �t. 62/2003 o različnih davčnih, upravnih in socialnih ukrepih (ley 62/2003, de medidas fiscales, administrativas y del orden social) z dne 30. decembra 2003 (BOE �t.
46874, ‘the Law on public procurement’), provides that the contractor must demonstrate the provision of a definitive guarantee within a period of 15 days from notification to him of the award of the contract.
313 z dne 31. decembra 2003, str. 46874, v nadaljevanju: zakon o javnih naročilih), določa, da mora izbrani ponudnik v petnajstih dneh po vročitvi odločbe o oddaji javnega naročila predložiti dokazilo o zavarovanju resnosti ponudbe.
Article 53 of the Law on public procurement states:
V členu 53 zakona o javnih naročilih je določeno:
‘Contracts shall be formed by award of the competent contracting authority, irrespective of the procedure or form of award used.’
„Pogodbe se sklenejo na podlagi oddaje javnih naročil, ki jo izvede pristojni naročnik, ne glede na postopek ali obliko oddaje javnega naročila, ki je bila uporabljena.“
Article 54 of that law states:
Člen 54 navedenega zakona določa:
Public contracts shall be finalised by an administrative document within a period of 30 days from the day following the notification of the award …’
Upravne pogodbe se morajo skleniti z upravnim dokumentom v tridesetih dneh po vročitvi odločbe o oddaji javnega naročila. […]
Subject to the exceptions provided for by this Law, their finalisation shall be conditional upon the provision by the undertaking of the guarantees provided for in this law for the protection of the public interest.
Zavarovanja, ki jih sklene podjetje, za varovanje javnega interesa v skladu s tem zakonom, so nujna za njihovo sklenitev, razen če ta zakon ne določa drugače.
Where, for reasons for which the contractor is responsible, the contract cannot be finalised within the period laid down, the authority may decide to terminate that contract, subject to the contractor being heard and, where the latter lodges an objection, to a report from the Council of State or an equivalent advisory body in the autonomous region concerned.
Če iz razlogov, za katere je neposredno odgovorna pogodbena stranka, pogodba ni mogla biti sklenjena v za to predpisanem roku, lahko upravni organi odstopijo od pogodbe, na podlagi zasli�anja zainteresirane stranke, in če se pogodbena stranka ne strinja s poročilom državnega sveta ali posvetovalnega organa enake stopnje zadevne avtonomne skupnosti.
In such circumstances, the provisional guarantee shall be forfeited and the loss sustained shall be made good.
V tem primeru je treba uporabiti začasno zavarovanje in plačati od�kodnino za povzročeno �kodo.
Where the public authority is responsible for the failure to finalise [the public contract], the contractor shall receive damages for the harm caused by the delay, regardless of whether he is entitled to claim the annulment of the public contract pursuant to Article 111(d).
Če so za nesklenitev neposredno odgovorni upravni organi, pogodbena stranka – poleg tega, da lahko zahteva razveljavitev pogodbe o javnem naročilu na podlagi člena 111(d) – prejme od�kodnino za �kodo, nastalo zaradi zamude.
The contract cannot be performed until it has been finalised, save in the cases provided for in Articles 71 and 72.’
Pogodba o javnem naročilu se ne more izvesti, če ni sklenjena, razen v primeru iz členov 71 in 72“.
According to Article 60a of the Law on public procurement, the persons interested in participating in a call for tenders and, in any event, the tenderers, may request the adoption of interim measures with the aim of correcting the alleged infringement of the applicable law or preventing further damage to the interests concerned, including measures to suspend or to ensure the suspension of the procedure for the award of a public contract.
V skladu s členom 60a zakona o javnih naročilih lahko zahtevajo vse zainteresirane osebe za udeležbo na javnem razpisu, in v vsakem primeru ponudniki, sprejetje začasnih ukrepov za popravo kr�itev veljavnega prava ali za preprečitev nastanka �kode ogroženim zainteresiranim ponudnikom, zlasti ukrepov za prekinitev postopka oddaje javnega naročila.
According to Article 65(1) of the Law on public procurement, once definitive, an administrative declaration to the effect that the acts preparatory to the contract or the award of the contract are invalid is to give rise, in all cases, to the invalidity of the contract itself, which is accordingly to be set aside.
V skladu s členom 65(1) zakona o javnih naročilih pomeni upravna razglasitev ničnosti pripravljalnih dejanj pogodbe ali oddaje javnega naročila, kadar je dokončna, vedno ničnost same pogodbe, ki jo je zato treba razveljaviti.