NORDIC PROCUREMENT ENFORCEMENT
LEGAL RESEARCH PROJECT

32004L0018: c3-47.1.c

Turnover

EU Law

32004L0018 - Classic (3rd generation)	Article 47.1.c
(c) a statement of the undertaking's overall turnover and, where appropriate, of turnover in the area covered by the contract for a maximum of the last three financial years available, depending on the date on which the undertaking was set up or the economic operator started trading, as far as the information on these turnovers is available.
31993L0037 - Works (2nd generation)	Article 26.1.c
(c) a statement of the firm's overall turnover and the turnover on construction works for the three previous financial years.
31993L0036 - Goods (2nd generation)	Article 22.1.c
(c) a statement of the supplier's overall turnover and its turnover in respect of the products to which the contract relates for the three previous financial years.
31992L0050 - Services (2nd generation)	Article 31.1.c
(c) a statement of the undertaking's overall turnover and its turnover in respect of the services to which the contract relates for the previous three financial years.
31971L0305 - Works (1st generation)	Article 25.1.c
(c) a statement of the firm's overall turnover and the turnover on construction works for the three previous financial years.
31977L0062 - Goods (1st generation)	Article 22.1.c
(c) a statement of the undertaking's overall turnover and its turnover in respect of the goods to which the contract relates for the three previous financial years.

EU Cases

Case	Pte	Ref	Text
C-71/92 Spain	41	W1-25.1.a-b W1-25.1.c	With regard to the complaint as thus clarified, it should be pointed out that in its judgment in Case 76/81 Transporoute v Minister of Public Works ([1982] ECR 417, paragraph 9) the Court has already stated that Directive 71/305 does not authorize the Member States to seek references other than those expressly mentioned in the directive except for the purpose of assessing the financial and economic standing of the contractors as provided for in Article 25 thereof. That finding applies by analogy to Directive 77/62, the relevant rules of which correspond in substance to those of Directive 71/305.
27/86 CEI	8-10	W1-na [3.2] W1-25.1.a-b W1-25.1.c	8 The first paragraph of article 25 of the directive provides that proof of the contractor’s economic and financial standing may, as a general rule, be furnished by one or more of the references mentioned therein. Under the second paragraph, the authorities awarding contracts are required to specify in the notice or in the invitation to tender which references they have chosen from among those mentioned in the previous paragraph "and what references other than those mentioned under (a), (b) or (c) are to be produced ". 9 It can be seen from the very wording of that article and, in particular, the second paragraph thereof, that the list of references mentioned therein is not exhaustive. 10 The reply to the national court must therefore be that the references enabling a contractor' s financial and economic standing to be determined are not exhaustively enumerated in article 25 of directive 71/305/eec.
27/86 CEI	11-18	W1-25.1.a-b W1-25.1.c	11 With regard to the national court’s second question in case 27/86, it should be noted that the total value of the works awarded to a contractor at a particular moment may be a useful factor in determining, in a specific instance, the financial and economic standing of a contractor in relation to his obligations. Since the references are not exhaustively enumerated in article 25 of the directive, there is therefore no reason why such information should not be required of tenderers by way of a reference within the meaning of that article. 12 However, in the light of the grounds of the order for reference, the content of the Belgian legislation mentioned therein and the arguments before this court, the national court’s question must be understood as also seeking to ascertain whether a national rule fixing the maximum value of works which may be carried out at one time is compatible with the directive. 13 In that regard, it should be noted that the fixing of such a limit is neither authorized nor prohibited by article 25 of the directive, because the purpose of that provision is not to delimit the power of the member states to fix the level of financial and economic standing required in order to take part in procedures for the award of public works contracts but to determine the references or evidence which may be furnished in order to establish the contractor' s financial and economic standing. 14 In order to rule on the compatibility of such a limit with the directive as a whole, the purpose and object of the directive must be borne in mind. The purpose of directive 71/305 is to ensure that the realization within the community of freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services in regard to public works contracts involves, in addition to the elimination of restrictions, the coordination of national procedures for the award of public works contracts. Such coordination "should take into account as far as possible the procedures and administrative practices in force in each member state" (second recital in the preamble to the directive). Article 2 expressly provides that the authorities awarding contracts are to apply their national procedures adapted to the provisions of the directive. 15 The directive therefore does not lay down a uniform and exhaustive body of community rules. Within the framework of the common rules which it contains, the member states remain free to maintain or adopt substantive and procedural rules in regard to public works contracts on condition that they comply with all the relevant provisions of community law and, in particular, the prohibitions flowing from the principles laid down in the treaty in regard to the right of establishment and the freedom to provide services. 16 The fixing in a member state of a maximum value for works which may be carried out at one time is not contrary to the said principles and there is nothing to suggest that it has the effect of restricting access by contractors in the community to public works contracts. 17 In those circumstances, it must be held that as community law now stands, there is no reason why the member states, in the context of their powers in regard to public works contracts, should not fix a maximum value for works which may be carried out at one time. 18 The reply to the national court should therefore be that a statement of the total value of the works awarded to a contractor may be required from tenderers as a reference within the meaning of article 25 of directive 71/305 and that neither that article nor any other provision of the directive precludes a member state from fixing the value of the works which may be carried out at one time.
274/83 Italy	29	W1-17.d W1-20 W1-22 W1-25.1.a-b W1-25.1.c W1-26.1.a-b W1-26.1.c-e	The fifth paragraph of article 10 of law no 741, to the extent to which it suspends until 31 December 1983 articles 17 and 18 of law no 584 of 8 august 1977, which implement articles 25 and 26 of the directive, is in the commission's opinion incompatible not only with the provisions listing the references which the authority awarding the contract may require in order to assess the contractor's financial and economic standing and technical knowledge and ability, but also with articles 17 (d), 20, 22 and 27 of the directive, according to which the suitability of contractors is to be checked in accordance with the criteria of economic and financial standing and technical knowledge and ability referred to in articles 25, 26 and 27 of the directive.
76/81 Transporoute	9	W1-25.1.a-b W1-25.1.c W1-27	Thus article 27 states that the authority awarding contracts may invite the contractor to supplement the certificates and documents submitted only within the limits of articles 23 to 26 of the directive, according to which member states may request references other than those expressly mentioned in the directive only for the purpose of assessing the financial and economic standing of the contractors as provided for in article 25 of the directive.
C-10/76 Italy	8	W1-20.1 W1-24.s1 W1-25.1.a-b W1-25.1.c W1-26.1.a-b W1-26.1.c-e	Finally, articles 20, 24, 25 and 26 of the directive lay down the criteria for qualitative selection which allow certain undertakings to be excluded from participation in the contracts, while the Italian law contains no provision to this effect and retains the wide discretion conferred on authorities awarding contracts by article 89 of the royal decree of 23 may 1924.