Search

The aim of this study is to look at the specifics of Romania and Poland in addressing the manner in which contracting authorities implement the transparency principle in public procurement award procedures. Generally, the practical applicability of this principle arises during both the public procurement award procedures and the contract performance. Yet, disclosure rules slightly vary in both Member States. As a common feature, in practice the level of disclosure during the performance of public procurement contract seems to be quite limited in both Poland and Romania. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Union's rule of law crisis has worsened and has led to ample reactions from academia and EU institutions. Most notably, the situation in Poland culminated in the activation of the procedure under Article 7(1) TEU by the European Commission. This article suggests that the infringement procedure under Article 258 TFEU may yield a fully complementary, yet more effective, means alongside existing measures to address not only specific and episodic violations of EU law, but also a general situation in a Member State as a systemic deficiency in the rule of law. Conscious of suggestions made before us in this regard, we offer a reconstruction of the infringement action de lege lata by engaging, step-by-step, with the procedural and substantive hurdles to overcome in this attempt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on constitutional moment for the European rule of law and Member States of European Union where ruling majorities willfully uproot separation of powers. It mentions guardians of the treaties have developed it in a way that allows for a juridical assessment of Member States' activities and opinions regarding European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission for Democracy through Law. It also mentions indistinguishable from the values of democracy and human rights.

The rules regarding modifications of public contracts were added to EU public procurement law in 2014 in order to clarify the conditions set forth by the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. However, the provisions that were ultimately adopted are not quite black and white as one might think. One of the grey areas might be the application of the principle of proportionality to modifications of public contracts. New directives mention proportionality as a principle of "procurement". This article presents a view that contracting authorities shall act in a proportionate manner also after the "procurement" decision has been made, i.e. when a contract has already been awarded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents some remarks on the relevance of a cross-border interest following the entry into force of the new Directive on the award of concession contracts (Concessions Directive). The Concessions Directive will apply to concession contracts the value of which is equal to or greater than EUR 5 186 000. As stated in the recitals thereto, this threshold reflects a clear cross-border interest. In certain cases, however, other factors, such as the place of the performance of a concession or the specifics of the market, could trigger cross-border interest, even for below-threshold concession contracts. The Concessions Directive will not apply to these contracts but they may still be the subject to the general principles of EU law, including the principle of transparency. This means that the Concessions Directive does not bring a bright-line rule and the contours of EU public procurement law in the field of concession contracts will remain unclear. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The subject of the opinion is the Treaty, including the relationship there of with other documents devoted to economic management in the European Union (EU). In the author's opinion, the scope of the subject matter of the Treaty is not a part of the exclusive competencies of the EU. However, the use by the Member States of the so-called Schengen method while concluding the Treaty violates the principle of loyal co-operation. This principle also constitutes an obstacle to the participation of EU institutions in the process of the application of the Treaty, the use by the parties of the rule of the so-called reversed qualiied majority and the settlement by the European Court of Justice of disputes between the Member States being parties to the Treaty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]