Language of document :

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 10 July 2017 — UAB ‘Roche Lietuva’ v VšĮ Kauno Dainavos poliklinika

(Case C-413/17)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: UAB ‘Roche Lietuva’

Other party: VšĮ Kauno Dainavos poliklinika

Question referred

Should the provisions of Articles 2 and 23 of, and of Annex VI to, Directive 2004/18 1 (whether together or separately, but without limitation to those provisions), be interpreted and understood as meaning that, in the case where a contracting authority — a human health care institution — intends to acquire supplies (medical diagnostic equipment and materials) or specific rights thereto by way of a public procurement procedure in order to be able to carry out tests by itself, its discretion includes the right to lay down in the technical specifications only such requirements for those supplies as do not describe in isolation the individual operational (technical) and use-related (functional) characteristics of the equipment and/or materials but instead define the qualitative parameters of the tests to be carried out as well as the performance of the testing laboratory, the content of which must be separately described in the specifications of the public procurement procedure in question?

____________

1 Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114).