natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Under the Treaty, a decision to withdraw an invitation to tender must be subject to a review procedure but that requirement was not reflected in 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.
Pri tej sodbi je �lo dejansko bolj za postopek, ki ni bil pokrit s pravilom, kakor za naročilo, izključeno iz določene direktive: Pogodba je nalagala, da mora obstajati pravno sredstvo zoper odločitev o razveljavitvi razpisa, ki pa z Direktivo Sveta 89/665/EGS z dne 21. decembra 1989 o usklajevanju zakonov in drugih predpisov o uporabi revizijskih postopkov oddaje javnih naročil za preskrbo in javnih naročil za gradnje (UL L 395, str.
33), as amended by Directive 92/50.
33), kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo 92/50, ni bilo določeno.
The setting of a financial threshold above which contracts are subject to public procurement directives is based on a single premiss, namely that contracts of small value do not attract operators established outside national borders; such contracts are thus devoid of Community implications.
Določitev gospodarskega praga, nad katerim so naročila podvržena direktivam, temelji na domnevi, da naj naročila majhnih vrednosti ne bi privlačila gospodarskih subjektov s sedežem zunaj državnih meja, zato naj ne bi spadala v doseg prava Skupnosti.
However, that rebuttable presumption is open to evidence to the contrary and therefore, as the Commission argues in its written observations, it must be borne in mind that a contract of small value may be of interest to operators in other Member States by reason, for example, of the fact that the place where the contract is to be performed may be close to their own country or because it would be beneficial to their commercial strategy.
Vendar ta domneva, iuris tantum, dopu�ča nasprotni dokaz, zato, kot navaja Komisija v svojih pisnih stali�čih, ne smemo izključiti možnosti, da je lahko naročilo majhne vrednosti zanimivo za tuje podjetnike, če je na primer kraj izvajanja blizu njihove države ali ker jim prina�a določene prednosti v okviru njihove tržne strategije.
24 — In that order, the Court ruled that it was contrary to Article 28 EC to include in the contract documents for a public works contract of small value a clause requiring, without further explanation, the use of products of a certain make.
24 – Točka 20, a contrario sensu, sodbe v zadevi Coname.
22 — Case C-231/03 [2005] ECR I-7287.
22 – Zadeva C-231/03, ZOdl., str. I-7287.
In paragraph 16 of that judgment, the Court recalled that the award of such a concession (for the management of a public gas-distribution service to a company in which there is a majority public holding) is not governed by any of the directives regulating the field of public contracts.
Točka 16 te sodbe razkriva, da oddaje te vrste koncesije (povezane z opravlja -njem javne storitve distribucije plina, ki se odda družbi z večinoma javnim kapitalom) ne ureja nobena od direktiv, ki urejajo področje javnih naročil.
In the absence of any such legislation, the consequences in Community law of the award of such concessions must be examined in the light of primary law and, in particular, of the fundamental freedoms provided for by the Treaty.
Ker taki predpisi ne obstajajo, je treba posledice prava Skupnosti, povezane z oddajo takih koncesij preučiti z vidika primarne zakonodaje in, natančneje, temeljnih svobo�čin, ki jih določa Pogodba.
The Court took the same view in its judgments in Case C-458/03 Parkíng Brixen [2005] ECR I-8585, paragraph 46, and Case C-410/04 ANAV [2006] ECR I-3303, paragraph 18.
V istem smislu sta bili izrečeni sodbi z dne 13. oktobra 2005 v zadevi Parkíng Brixen (C-458/03, ZOdl., str.
25 — Paragraph 20 of the judgment in Coname, interpreted a contrario.
I-8585, točka 46) in z dne 6. aprila 2006 v zadevi ANAV (C-410/04, ZOdl., str.
23 — Case C-59/00 [2001] ECR I-9505.
23 – Zadeva C-59/00, Recueil, str. I-9505.
26 — Case C-264/03 [2005] ECR I-8831.
26 – Zadeva C-264/03, ZOdl., str. I-8831.
B — Less than a fundamental principle …
B – Manj kot temeljno načelo…
Accordingly, that quantitative limit clearly serves only as a guideline and it therefore follows that there is nothing to prevent a contract of small value from being of interest in other Member States, giving rise to the factor which triggers the application of Community law and its objectives.
Ta količinska omejitev je torej očitno samo dogovor in zato sploh ne more izključiti možnosti, da lahko naročilo v nižjem znesku prav tako zbudi pozornost v drugih državah članicah, zato se tu pojavi potreba po uporabi prava Skupnosti in njegovih ciljev.
Consequently, the procedures for the award of those contracts which, despite their limited interest, have a European dimension must comply with the principles laid down in the Treaty, subject always to the fact that contracts for values higher than the amounts indicated in the directives must comply with stricter coordinating provisions. 27
Postopki oddaje teh naročil, ki imajo kljub majhnemu interesu evropski doseg, morajo zato spo�tovati načela iz Pogodbe, ne glede na to, da so naročila, ki zadevajo vi�je zneske od zneskov, navedenih v direktivah, podvržena strožjim usklajevalnim določbam. 27
The concepts of ‘fundamental principle’ or ‘fundamental rule’, as used in the caselaw I have cited, have a very specific meaning.
Pojma „temeljno načelo“ in „temeljno pravilo“, kot sta uporabljena v sodni praksi, ki sem jo navedel, se nana�ata na natančno določeno vsebino.
They do not refer to the axiological elements latent in the Treaty, or to any kind of measure adopted to attain its objectives; instead, they fall between those two extremes, in the letter of the primary law where the ‘ constituent members’ of the Community laid down the objectives they intended to achieve together with the essential means of attaining them.
Ne nana�ata se niti na prikrite aksiolo�ke elemente iz Pogodbe niti na kateri koli ukrep, ki je bil sprejet za doseganje ciljev, postavljenih v tem aktu, ampak se v besedilu primarnega prava ume�čata natančno med obe skrajnosti, na mesto, na katerem so si „sestavljavci ustave“ Skupnosti zadali cilje, ki jih želijo doseči s temeljnimi sredstvi za njihovo doseganje.
A cursory examination of Articles 2 EC and 3 EC reveals that they relate to the unrestricted movement of persons, goods, services and capital, guaranteed by the corresponding freedoms of movement (Articles 23 EC, 43 EC and 49 EC), as well as to the abolition of all discrimination on grounds of nationality (Article 12 EC), which is a horizontal principle integral to any project to integrate a number of countries.
Hitro branje členov 2 ES in 3 ES nam razkrije, da se nana�ata na prosto gibanje oseb, blaga, storitev in kapitala, ki se zagotovi z ustreznimi kategorijami svobode gibanja (členi 23 ES, 43 ES in 49 ES), katerim se pridružuje, kar zadeva prečno vrednost, neločljivo povezano s projektom integracije več držav, popolna odprava kakr�ne koli diskriminacije glede na državljanstvo (člen 12 ES).
One such provision, Article 30(4) of Directive 93/37, which is applicable ratione temporis to the disputes in the main proceedings and is reproduced in Article 55(1) and (2) of Directive 2004/18, prohibits the automatic exclusion of abnormally low tenders.
Ena od teh določb, člen 30(4) Direktive 93/37, ki se uporablja ratione temporis v sporih o glavni stvari in se njegova vsebina ponovi v členu 55(1) in (2) Direktive 2004/18, prepoveduje samodejno izključitev neobičajno nizkih ponudb.
The Consiglio di Stato asks whether that prohibition constitutes a fundamental rule of Community law or whether it is, at the very least, a consequence of the principle of competition, considered in conjunction with the principles of administrative transparency and nondiscrimination on grounds of nationality, which must also be complied with when awarding contracts which do not fall within the scope of those directives.
Consiglio di Stato pa želi izvedeti, ali ta prepoved spada med temeljna načela prava Skupnosti oziroma ali jo je mogoče �teti vsaj za posledico načela pristojnosti v kombinaciji z načeloma preglednosti uprave in nediskriminacije glede na državljanstvo, ki jih je treba prav tako upo�tevati med postopkom oddaje naročil, ki niso pokrita s temi direktivami.
That view, which is similar to the one contained in recital 2 in the preamble to Directive 2004/18, is also discernible in the judgments I have cited.
To trditev, ki spominja na trditev iz druge uvodne izjave Direktive 2004/18, je mogoče razbrati tudi iz navedenih odločitev.
In Telaustria and Telefonadress, the Court invoked the principle of nondiscrimination on grounds of nationality (paragraph 60); in HI, the Court referred to the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide ser-
Načelo nediskriminacije glede na državljanstvo je izpostavljeno v točki 60 sodbe Telaustria in Telefonadress; poleg tega se točki 42 in 47 sodbe HI dotakneta svobode ustanavljanja
OPINION OF MR RUIZ-JARABO — JOINED CASES C-147/06 AND C-148/06 or services to contracting entities in other Member States.
SKLEPNI PREDLOGI RUIZ-JARABOJA – ZDRUŽENI ZADEVI C-147/06 IN C-148/06 in za�čita interesov gospodarskih subjektov določene države članice, ki želi prodajati svoje proizvode ali storitve naročnikom iz drugih držav članic.
29 vices (paragraphs 42 and 47); in the order in Vestergaard, the Court relied on the free movement of goods as the ratio decidendi (paragraph 21); while, in Coname, the Court again invoked Articles 43 EC and 49 EC to prohibit indirect discrimination on grounds of nationality.
29 in svobode opravljanja storitev; odločitev v sklepu Vestergaard temelji na drugi kategoriji svobode gibanja, to je prostem pretoku blaga (točka 21); nazadnje se sodba Coname spet sklicuje na člena 43 ES in 49 ES, na podlagi katerih zavrača posredno diskriminacijo glede na državljanstvo.
Reversing that perspective, it becomes clear that the aim is twofold: to avoid the risk of preference being given to national tenderers (buy national) and to ensure that the body responsible for awarding the contract is guided by considerations other than economic ones 30(thus, the essential award criterion is always that of the lowest or most economically advantageous tender).
Po drugi strani se zdi, da delovanje poteka na dveh ravneh: gre za odpravo tveganja, da bi imeli prednost nacionalni ponudniki (buy national) in da bi pristojni naročnik podlegel drugim, negospodarskim pomislekom 30(zato je glavno merilo za oddajo naročil vedno merilo najnižje cene oziroma ekonomsko najugodnej�e ponudbe).
Clearly, the ‘fundamental principles’ of the Treaty, which are capable of limiting the powers of the Member States in procedures for the award of contracts excluded from the coordinating provisions laid down in the sectoral directives, are the same as the principles referred to in the preambles to those directives, to which the Court has drawn particular attention.
Treba je torej ugotoviti, da se „temeljna načela“ Pogodbe, ki lahko oslabijo moč držav članic v postopkih oddaje naročil, ki ne spadajo na področje usklajevanja s sektorskimi direktivami, ujemajo z načeli, ki so navedena v preambulah prav tistih direktiv, ki jih je izpostavilo Sodi�če.
In those circumstances, the first question can only be answered in the negative, since, in a procedure for the award of a public works contract, the automatic exclusion of abnormally low tenders does not run counter to any fundamental principle of the Treaty. Neither the fundamental freedoms nor the prohibition of discrimination require that, in all circumstances and as an absolute rule, a
V tem okviru je treba na prvo vpra�anje za predhodno odločanje vsekakor odgovoriti nikalno, saj ni samodejna izključitev neobičajno nizkih ponudb med postopkom oddaje določenega javnega naročila za gradnje v nasprotju z nobenim temeljnim načelom Pogodbe, temeljne svobo�čine oziroma prepoved zgoraj navedenih vrst diskriminacije namreč ne predpostavljajo, da je treba
Moreover, that should surprise no one since, as recital 2 in the preamble to Directive 2004/18 makes clear, the provisions of that directive are founded on those fundamental principles. Indeed, those directives pursue a limited direct aim, namely the coordination of procedures governed by the sectoral directives with a view to encouraging the development of effective competition in the field of public contracts 28for the purposes of securing the fundamental freedoms of European integration.
Sicer pa to niti najmanj ne preseneča, saj – kot je poudarjeno v drugi uvodni izjavi Direktive 2004/18 – njene določbe izhajajo prav iz teh načel in si zadevne direktive prizadevajo za doseganje neposrednega omejenega cilja, to je uskladitve postopkov, da bi s tem spodbudili razvoj učinkovite konkurence na področju javnih naročil, 28in sicer v imenu uresničitve glavnih svobo�čin, povezanih z evropsko integracijo.
30 — Case C-44/96 Mannesmann Anlagenbau Austria and Others [1998] ECR I-73, paragraph 33; BFI Holding, paragraph 42; University of Cambridge, paragraph 17; and Case C-237/99 Commission v France, paragraph 42.
30 – Sodbe z dne 15. januarja 1998 v zadevi Mannesmann Anlagenbau Austria in drugi (C-44/96, Recueil, str. I-73, točka 33); BFI Holding (točka 42); University of Cambridge (točka 17) in Komisija proti Franciji (C-237/99, točka 42).
SECAP AND SANTORSO connection to the real world and might just as well never have existed.
SECAP IN SANTORSO ponudniku, ki predloži tako ponudbo, absolutno in vedno dati možnost, da pove svoje mnenje, ter �ele nato odločati o usodi njegove ponudbe.
In particular, that is because logic dictates that the principle of effectiveness, which also applies in the field of Community public procurement law, must operate in this sphere.
To �e zlasti velja, ker se je treba ravnati v skladu z načelom učinkovitosti, ki se uporablja tudi v okviru prava Skupnosti za področje javnih naročil.
Finally, the management of public interests necessitates such effectiveness, which, on occasions, is in conflict with the pace of a selection procedure complete with guarantees. 31
Nazadnje je taka učinkovitost, ki je včasih nezdružljiva z ritmom izbirnega postopka, obremenjenega s �tevilnimi jamstvi, potrebna tudi zaradi zagotavljanja javnih interesov. 31
C — … but more than a mere rule of positive law
C – … a več kot preprosto pravilo pozitiv­nega prava
The implied principles
Implicitna načela
The prohibition of discrimination, particularly where it is based on nationality, entails a duty of transparency to ensure that, for the benefit of any potential tenderer, there is a degree of advertising sufficient to enable the market to be opened up to competition and that the impartiality of procurement procedures can be monitored, as the Court declared in Unitron Scandinavia and 3-S (paragraphs 31 and 32). 33
Za uresničevanje prepovedi kakr�ne koli diskriminacije, zlasti če se ta izvaja glede na državljanstvo, je nujna zagotovitev preglednosti, ki vsem potencialnim ponudnikom zagotavlja ustrezno stopnjo ogla�evanja, s čimer se omogoči odpiranje trga konkurenci in nadzor nad nepristranskostjo postopkov naročil, kot to izhaja iz sodbe z dne 18. novembra 1999 v zadevi Unitron Scandinavia in 3-S (točki 61 in 62). 33
Article 30(4) of Directive 93/37 is not a discretionary — perhaps even capricious — provision of the legislature, which has no
Vendar pa člen 30(4) Direktive 93/37 ni diskrecijska določba zakonodajalca, ki bi jo bilo mogoče po potrebi spreminjati, brez kakr�ne koli zunanje povezave in ki prav tako lahko ne bi nikoli obstajala.
32 — The Court observed in that judgment that it is apparent from the very wording of that provision that the contracting authority is under a duty to identify suspect tenders, to allow the undertakings concerned to demonstrate their genuineness, to assess the merits of the explanations provided, and to take a decision as to whether to admit or reject those tenders (paragraph 55).
32 – V sodbi je poudarjeno, da iz same določbe izhaja, da mora naročnik opredeliti sumljive ponudbe, zadevnim podjetjem omogočiti, da dokažejo svojo resnost, presoditi o upo�tevnosti pojasnil, ki jih predložijo zainteresirane stranke, in sprejeti odločitev o dopustitvi oziroma zavrnitvi teh ponudb (točka 55).
33 — Case C-275/98 [1999] ECR I-8291.
33 – Zadeva C-275/98, Recueil, str. I-8291.
31 — Point 30 of my Opinion in Lombardini and Mantovani.
31 – Točka 30 mojih sklepnih predlogov z dne 5. junija 2001 v zadevi, v kateri je bila izrečena sodba Lombardini in Mantovani.
That aspect is more marked in the Italian system, which defines the concept, having regard to the subjectmatter of the contract and to the value of the different bids, by means of a mathematical formula for setting the anomaly threshold.
Ta značilnost je �e toliko bolj poudarjena v italijanskem sistemu, ki ta pojem natančno opredeljuje glede na vsebino naročila in ceno različnih ponudb, pri čemer je prag nenavadnosti določen z matematičnim mehanizmom.
In that context, it is reasonable to ask, as does the Consiglio di Stato, whether, since it does not state a fundamental principle of Community law, Article 30(4) of Directive 93/37 comprises one of the logical consequences of Community law, which have a binding effect on public contracts, regardless of whether they fall within the scope of the directives, if they are of Community interest.
V tem okviru se torej zdi upravičeno vpra�ati se, kot je to storilo Consiglio di Stato, ali je zadevni člen 30(4) Direktive 93/37, če torej v njem ni izraženo temeljno načelo evropskega prava, ena od njegovih nujnih posledic, ki jim morajo biti podvržena javna naročila z interesom Skupnosti, ne glede na to, ali jih pokrivajo direktive.
In other words, if the automatic exclusion of anomalous tenders is contrary to those consequences, is it appropriate to apply the contested rule to contracts which do not fall within the scope of Directive 93/37?
Z drugimi besedami, ali bi bilo treba, če bi samodejna izključitev ponudb kr�ila te posledice, zadevno pravilo uporabiti za naročila, ki ne spadajo na področje uporabe Direktive 93/37?
The tenderers who, as a result of advertising, are aware of the contract and its nature draw up their bids in secret, so that each of them knows only the details of his own bid.
Konkurenti, ki so iz ogla�evanja izvedeli za storitev in njeno vrsto, izdelajo svoje načrte „skrivaj“, tako da je vsak od njih seznanjen samo z lastnim načrtom.
In general, in view of the fact that the system gives preference to the lowest tender or the most economically advantageous one, very low bids are submitted with the aim of offering the lowest price, even at the risk of reducing the profits of the undertaking concerned.
Ker sistem nagrajuje najcenej�o oziroma ekonomsko najugodnej�o ponudbo, so ponudbe na splo�no zelo skopo odmerjene, da se dobi najnižja cena, ki utegne celo načeti dobiček podjetja.
Tenderers and the concept of an abnormally low tender
Ponudniki in pojem neobičajno nizke ponudbe
Accordingly, all parties take the same risk that, once the sealed envelopes are opened, their tender will be treated as anomalous.
Zato ob odpiranju ovojnic vsi tvegajo, da bodo njihove ponudbe opredeljene kot „neobičajne“.
The concept of an abnormally low tender is not made up of abstract features; on the contrary, it is defined by reference to the contract to be awarded and to the work involved.
Pojem neobičajno nizke ponudbe ni abstrakten, ampak je opredeljen v odnosu do naročila, ki se oddaja, in glede na zadevno storitev.
34It therefore has the characteristics of an indeterminate concept, which at first sight is imprecise but which may be clarified by reference to the specific nature of the contract.
34Ima torej značilnosti nedoločenega koncepta, ki je a priori nenatančen, vendar hkrati predvidljiv glede na posebnosti naročila.
However, that balance is disrupted where one or more of the tenderers have at their disposal information which is capable of influencing the fixing of the anomaly threshold, thereby removing the essential equality.
Vendar se to ravnovesje poru�i, ko ima kateri od konkurentov na voljo elemente presoje, ki bodo vplivali na določitev praga nenavadnosti, saj se s tem poru�i nujno potrebna enakost.
34 — Point 32 of my Opinion in Lombardini and Mantovani.
34 – Točka 32 sklepnih predlogov Lombardini in Mantovani.
Concerted practices in the submission of tenders
Zato naj ne bi bil zaradi neposredne zavrnitve neobičajnih ponudnikov, ne da bi jim dopustili možnost obrazložitve, nihče diskriminiran.
In the light of the facts alleged by Turin Municipal Council, the Consiglio di Stato outlines a scenario, which the Court must bear in mind, whereby the automatic exclusion of excessive discounts, required by Article 21(1)(a) of Law No 109/94, encourages collusive agreements between undertakings in order to influence ex ante the outcome of the selection process.
Ko je Consiglio di Stato presodil dejstva, na katera se sklicuje mestna občina Torino, je ugotovil položaj, ki ga Sodi�če ne bi smelo prezreti, v katerem samodejna izključitev nerazumnih popustov, ki je neizogibna v skladu s členom 21(1a) zakona �t. 109/1994, spodbuja dogovore, katerih namen je vplivati na rezultate izbirnega postopka.
However, the situation is different if, as a result of collusive agreements, a group of undertakings, usually ones operating in the territorial market of the contract, collude with one another to draw up almost identical bids, with only minimal differences between them, so that the bids submitted by competitors who are not party to those agreements are classified as abnormally low and those tenderers have no opportunity to submit explanations or provide evidence of the viability of their bids.
Vendar pa to ni tako, če se skupina podjetnikov, ki običajno delujejo na območnem trgu razpisa, z namenom zlorabe dogovori, da bodo izdelali homogene ponudbe z minimalnimi razlikami, zato bi se ponudbe konkurentov, ki ne bi bili vključeni v te dogovore, zdele neobičajno nizke, pri čemer ti ne bi imeli možnosti niti za svojo obrambo niti za dokazovanje kakovosti svoje ponudbe.
Community law does not remain on the sidelines when faced with such a situation.
Pravo Skupnosti glede tega ne stoji ob strani.
Such practices therefore undermine the Community law principles of transparency and fair competition, which are applicable to public contracts, since, where the disadvantaged tenderers are established in other Member States, they must have the opportunity to explain their position if the discrimination prohibited by the Treaty is to be avoided.
V takih primerih sta okrnjeni preglednost in zdrava konkurenca, ki sta načeli prava Skupnosti v sektorju javnih naročil, saj morajo neuspe�ni kandidati s sedežem v drugih državah članicah imeti možnost pojasniti svoje stali�če, če se želimo izogniti diskriminaciji, ki je po Pogodbi prepovedana.
Turin Municipal Council stated at the hearing in these preliminary ruling proceedings that, following the decision not to apply the national provision, there was a significant reduction in the number of tenders submitted with the aim of distorting free competition.
Mestna občina Torino je med obravnavo v tem postopku za predhodno odločanje navedla, da je zaradi neuporabe nacionalne določbe znatno upadlo �tevilo ponudb, predloženih z namenom izkrivljanja svobodne konkurence.
It is clear that the automatic exclusion of abnormally low tenders in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 21(1)(a) is not in itself discriminatory, in view of the objective nature of that provision.
Očitno mehanizem izključevanja ponudb, ki se na podlagi prvega odstavka te določbe izkažejo za neobičajno nizke, sam po sebi ni diskriminatoren, saj je objektivno opredeljen.