Samenwerkende overheden maken vaak gebruik van de quasi-inbestedingsuitzondering. De criteria van deze uitzondering leiden tot discussie in de praktijk. In de Irado zaak heeft het Hof van Justitie de vraag beantwoord welke omzet moet worden genomen als basis voor...
Matanja spreekt met Janet over schadevergoeding naar aanleiding van aanbestedingsprocedures. Ze behandelen verschillende nationale en Europese uitspraken en gaan dieper in op de mogelijkheid tot verkrijging van schadevergoeding en de bepaling van de hoogte...
Matanja en Willem spreken over het arrest 'Polysmindigheten', waarin het Europese Hof de kans krijgt een uitzondering op het leerstuk van de wezenlijke wijziging te verduidelijken: de 'de minimis'-regeling. Op grond van die regeling is een wijziging met een geringe...
Willem en Matanja spreken met elkaar over het onderzoek dat Willem heeft gedaan in opdracht van de Europese Commissie naar de coherentie van Europese aanbestedingsregelgeving. Ze bespreken opvallende voorbeelden, zoals de spanning tussen de verplichtingen uit...
In this episode, Marta and Willem explore how artificial intelligence could support more sustainable public procurement practices— and the risks that come with it. The conversation builds on Marta’s co-authored recent open-access article, “Leveraging AI for Sustainable Public Procurement: Opportunities and Challenges.”
They begin by outlining the motivation and context for the research, before examining where AI could add value in procurement processes. This includes...
In this episode, Marta and Willem discuss the hot topic of the ongoing Irado case and the impacts it is set to have on the world of European Public Procurement Law. How to calculate the activities criterion in article 12 Directive 2014/24/EU? They begin the episode with a short chat about their recent conferences, before moving to a brief introduction to the case and the related unclarities in the Article 12 Directive 2014/24/EU on how the activities criterion is to be calculated. Namely, Willem explains how, from the text alone, it is unclear whether the activities criterion should be based on the entity you contract with, or the holding structure in which it provides its services and how this could have significant ramifications on the applicability of the exemption. They then proceed to talk about the opinion of Advocate General Rantos and express their own perspectives on the matter. They discuss whether the procurement practices in certain countries were legitimate interpretations or circumventions of the directive. Lastly, in the dessert, they switch gears and reflect on strategies that help them foster a good and productive community in the classroom.
Georg Huith spreekt met Matanja over het artikel dat ze samen schreven voor het Tijdschrift Aanbestedingsrecht en Staatssteun: Gelijkheid als bron van (on)zekerheid, Deel II: over de rechtsgevolgen van gronduitgifte in strijd met de ‘Didam-regels’ (TA 2025/21). Ze...
This blog post is the second in a two-part series that examines the evolving EU regulatory landscape on corporate sustainability due diligence and its implications for the future of public procurement law. Not only does it consider the recent regulatory simplification wave in the arena of corporate sustainability, but it also examines the relationship between the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and public procurement law. Building on the previous research on the challenges of incorporating corporate sustainability due diligence in public procurement, this two-part series seeks to analyse the identified challenges and to share further reflections considering the Commission’s recent emphasis on European competitiveness and the anticipated revision of public procurement legislation.
This blog post is the first in a two-part series that examines the evolving EU regulatory landscape on corporate sustainability due diligence and its implications for the future of public procurement law. In particular, it considers the recent shift in emphasis toward regulatory simplification and what this may mean for the future of corporate sustainability. It also sets the stage for a broader discussion on the interplay between the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and public procurement law, particularly in view of the forthcoming revision of the EU public procurement framework. In this context, it needs to be noted that the points of tension between corporate sustainability due diligence and public procurement have been discussed in detail elsewhere.
In this blog post, the author analyses Advocate General (AG) Sánchez-Bordona’s Opinion on Case C-82/24 delivered on 6 February 2025, which concerns Article 2 of Directive 2004/18 (Article 18 of Directive 2014/24) on principles of awarding contracts and its role in the application of provisions of national law to the procurement contract by analogy. In his Opinion, the AG concludes that though principles of procurement do not preclude a clause in a public contract referring to provisions of civil code where the contract remains silent, extending contractual obligations in a way that could not be foreseen by a reasonably well-informed and normally diligent contractor is incompatible with the said principles. In this context, the question referred to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) concerns the intersection of public procurement law and contract law.
