English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Under Directive 1989/665/EEC, locus standi in public procurement remedies is recognised to at least any person having or having had an interest in obtaining a particular contract and who has been or risks being harmed by an alleged infringement. The Croatian Public Procurement Act does not diverge from this definition. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has established expansive and detailed case-law on locus standi, and in particular on what is to be considered a ‘particular contract’ under Article 1(3) of Directive 1989/665/EEC. Unfortunately, the case-law of the State Commission for Supervision of Public Procurement Procedures (DKOM) and of the High Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia (VUSRH) established a much narrower interpretation. This paper aims to analyse relevant case-law of the CJEU, DKOM and VUSRH and explain how has this narrow interpretation of ‘particular contract’ affected the availability of public procurement remedies in Croatia.  Keywords: public procurement remedies, locus standi, interpretation of particular contract

Locus Standi and the Interpretation of ‘Interest to Obtain a Particular Contract’ in Public Procurement Remedies