Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 October 2015

EU public contractsTender procedureIrregularity of the administrative procedureEffectsAnnulment of the contested decisionConditions (see para. 34)

EU public contractsTender procedureAward of contractsMost economically advantageous tenderAward criteriaObservance of the principle of equal treatment of tenderers and of the principle of transparency (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 966/2012, Art. 110(2); Commission Regulation No 1268/2012, Art. 149(1) to (3)) (see paras 37, 38)

EU public contractsConclusion of a contract following a call for tendersAbnormally low offerObligation on the awarding authority to implement an inter partes verification procedureScopeAward of the contract to the economically most advantageous offer (Commission Regulation No 1268/2012, Arts 149(2), and 151(1)) (see paras 60-62)

EU public contractsTender procedureObligation to comply with the principle of equal treatment of tenderersNo need absolutely to neutralise all the advantages of the contracting tenderer in place (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 966/2012, Art. 102(1)) (see paras 74-77)

Non-contractual liabilityConditionsUnlawfulnessDamageCausal linkCumulative conditionsOne of the conditions not satisfiedClaim for compensation dismissed in its entirety (Art. 340, second para., TFEU) (see paras 93-95)

Re:

First, application for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 3 December 2013 rejecting the tenders submitted by the applicant in the context of a call for tenders concerning the provision of safety checks services and, secondly, a claim for compensation for the damage allegedly suffered as a result of that decision.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action;

Orders Secolux, Association pour le contrôle de la sécurité de la construction, to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.