| | 32004L0018: c3-9.5.a.3Not exceed 20 %    
| 32004L0018 - Classic (3rd generation) | Article 9.5.a.3 | | However, the contracting authorities may waive such application in respect of lots the estimated value of which net of VAT is less than EUR 80000 for services or EUR 1 million for works, provided that the aggregate value of those lots does not exceed 20 % of the aggregate value of the lots as a whole. | | 32004L0017 - Utilities (3rd generation) | Article 17.6.a.3 | | However, the contracting entities may waive such application in respect of lots the estimated value of which, net of VAT, is less than EUR 80000 for services or EUR 1 million for works, provided that the aggregate value of those lots does not exceed 20 % of the aggregate value of the lots as a whole. | | 31993L0037 - Works (2nd generation) | Article 6.3.third sentence | | Contracting authorities shall be permitted to depart from this provision for lots whose estimated value net of VAT is less than ECU 1 000 000, provided that the total estimated value of all the lots exempted does not, in consequence, exceed 20 % of the total estimated value of all lots. | | 31992L0050 - Services (2nd generation) | Article 7.4.3.s2 | | Contracting authorities may waive application of paragraph 1 for any lot which has an estimated value net of VAT of less than ECU 80000, provided that the total value of such lots does not exceed 20 % of the total value of all the lots. | | 31993L0038 - Utilities (2nd generation) | Article 14.10.2.s3 | | However, in the case of works contracts, contracting entities may derogate from paragraph 1 in respect of lots the estimated value net of VAT for which is less than ECU 1 million, provided that the aggregate value of those lots does not exceed 20 % of the overall value of the lots. | | 31989L0440 - Fourth amendment of Works (1st generation) | Article 1.6=W1-4a.3.s3 | | Contracting authorities shall be permitted to depart from this provision for lots whose estimated value net of VAT is less than ECU 1 000 000, provided that the total estimated value of all the lots exempted does not, in consequence, exceed 20 % of the total estimated value of all lots. | | 31990L0531 - Utilities (1st generation) | Article 12.6.2.s3 | | However, in the case of works contracts, contracting entities may derogate from paragraph 1 in respect of lots whose estimated value net of VAT is less then ECU 1 million, provided that the aggregate value of those lots does not exceed 20 % of the overall value of the lots. |
Legislation concerning national procurement of works| DLB-1410/07 - First codification of Third law on National Procurement (NPL3C1) | Article 12.3.1 | | 1) der er tale om delarbejder, hvis anslåede værdi eksklusive moms er 500.000 kr. eller derunder, og den samlede værdi af disse delarbejder ikke overstiger 20 pct. af de samlede arbejders værdi, | | DL-338/05 - Third law on National Procurement (NPL3) | Article 12.2-7 | | 1) der er tale om delarbejder, hvis anslåede værdi eksklusive moms er 500.000 kr. eller derunder, og den samlede værdi af disse delarbejder ikke overstiger 20 pct. af de samlede arbejders værdi, | | DBK-758/01 - First order under second law on National Procurement (NPL2BK1) | Article 13.3.1 | Stk. 3. Underhåndsbud kan herudover indhentes
1) på delarbejder, hvis anslåede værdi ekskl. moms er 500.000 kr. eller derunder, forudsat den samlede værdi af disse delarbejder ikke overstiger 20 pct. af de samlede arbejders værdi, | | DBK-595/02 - Second order under second law on National Procurement (NPL2BK2) | Article 13.4.1 | Stk. 4. For arbejder med en anslået samlet værdi ekskl. moms på mere end 2 mio.kr. kan underhåndsbud kun indhentes i følgende tilfælde:
1) på delarbejder, hvis anslåede værdi ekskl. moms er 500.000 kr. eller derunder, forudsat den samlede værdi af disse delarbejder ikke overstiger 20 pct. af de samlede arbejders værdi, |
| Case | Pte | Ref | Text | C-16/98
France | 74-80 | U2-14.1.c
U2-14.10.2.s3 | 74 The Commission complains that, by artificially splitting the contract for the works at issue, the French authorities infringed the provisions of the Directive as regards the threshold.
75 It must be observed that Article 14(1)(c) established the threshold for the applicability of the Directive at ECU 5 000 000 and that, as regards the lots of a work, Article 14(10), second subparagraph, whilst requiring the value of all the lots to be aggregated, allows derogation from the Directive in respect of lots the estimated value, net of VAT, for which is less than ECU 1 million, provided that the aggregate value of those lots does not exceed 20% of the overall value of the lots.
76 In view of the finding made at paragraph 66 of this judgment, it must be ascertained whether the value of the contracts for electrification exceeds the above thresholds.
77 The documents before the Court show that those contracts, of which there are 19, account for a total estimated value, net of VAT, of FRF 483 000 000 over the three year period envisaged. That sum is well in excess of the threshold of ECU 5 000 000, which, at the material time, was equivalent to FRF 33 966 540.
78 It follows that the French authorities should have applied the Directive to all the lots making up the contract for electrification work, apart from those whose estimated individual value, net of VAT, was below the threshold of ECU 1 million which, at the material time, was equivalent to an amount of FRF 6 793 308, provided that their aggregate value did not exceed 20% of the overall value of the lots.
79 The evidence put forward by the Commission in reply to a question put by the Court shows that, of the electrification contracts only one, the estimated value, net of VAT, of which was FRF 6 000 000, did not exceed the threshold of ECU 1 million. The value of that contract was also less than 20% of the estimated total value, net of VAT, of all the electrification work.
80 The French authorities did not publish an invitation to tender at Community level for the 18 other electrification contracts, but only for six of them. Accordingly, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 14(1)(c), and (10), second subparagraph, of the Directive. |
| Case | Pte | Ref | Text | N-071207
Scan-Plast Produktion | 1+K1-2 | NPL3-1.1-impl
NPL3-12.3.1 | Ad påstand 1 og spørgsmål 5
1. Efter det oplyste har indklagede – som også erkendt af indklagede - handlet i strid med Tilbudsloven som anført i disse påstande.
.....
K1. Ad påstand 1 Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tilbudslovens § 12, stk. 3, nr. 1, ved at undlade forud for indgåelse af kontrakt om opførelse af 2 toiletbygninger at iværksætte en licitation efter Tilbudsloven, uagtet dette delarbejdes værdi eksklusiv moms oversteg 500.000 kr.
K2. Ad Spørgsmål 5 Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tilbudsloven ved ikke forud for indgåelse af kontrakt om renoveringen af det rekreative landskab ved Fuglsang sø at have gennemført en licitation efter Tilbudsloven vedrørende en kontrakt om den samlede renovering af det rekreative landskab.
[I 2005-2006 lod indklagede, Herning kommune, et rekreativt landskab ved Fuglsang Sø renovere. Kommunen undlod at gennemføre en licitation efter Tilbudsloven (lov nr. 338 af 18. maj 2005 om indhentning af tilbud i byggeog anlægssektoren) af bygge- og anlægsarbejdet, som kommunens tekniske rådgiver på forhånd havde anslået til at ville koste 14 mio kr. Projektet omfattede bl.a. opførelse af to toiletbygninger, og vedrørende opførelsen af disse to bygninger indhentede indklagede underhåndstilbud, men alene fra én virksomhed, nemlig Zenzo Group ApS. Den 27. marts 2006 indgik indklagede aftale med Zenzo Group ApS om levering af 2 toiletbygninger for en pris på 557.500 kr. excl. moms.] |
|
|
