Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 November 2011 – CTG Luxembourg PSF v Court of Justice

(Joined Cases T-170/10 and T-340/10)

Public service contracts – Procurement procedure – Provision of support services to IT systems users – Rejection of a tenderer’s bid because it was lodged out of time – Award of contract to another tenderer – Action for annulment – Non-contractual liability

1.                     European Union public contracts – Tender procedure – Fixing of a time-limit for the lodging and sending of tenders – Lawfulness – No duty to specify the relevant time zone (Commission Regulation No 2342/2002, Arts 130(2)(a) and 145(3), first para.) (see paras 26-35)

2.                     European Union public contracts – Tender procedure – Time-limits for access to documents calling for tenders – Obligation to supply potential tenderers with the additional information requested – Limits (Commission Regulation No 2342/2002, Art. 141(2)) (see paras 39-42)

3.                     European Union public contracts – Tender procedure – Decision to reject a tender – Duty to state reasons – Scope (Council Regulation No 1605/2002, Art. 100(2); Commission Regulation No 2342/2002, Art. 149(2) and (3)) (see paras 46-47, 49)

4.                     European Union public contracts – Tender procedure – Irregularity of the administrative procedure – Effects – Annulment of the contested decision – Conditions (see para. 51)

Re:

APPLICATIONS (i) for annulment, first, of the decision of the Court of Justice of 9 February 2010 to reject the tender submitted by the consortium of which the applicant is a member in the context of procurement procedure reference AO 008/2009 entitled ‘1 st and 2 nd level support for the users of IT and telephone systems, call centre, end user hardware management’ and, secondly, of the decision of 5 March 2010 confirming the rejection and, thirdly, the decision to award the contract to another tenderer, and (ii) for compensation for the loss allegedly incurred by the applicant as a result of those decisions.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the applications;

2. Orders Computer Task Group Luxembourg PSF SA (CTG Luxembourg PSF) to pay the costs.