| | 32004L0018: c3-II.AServices referred to in 1(2)(d), full application    
| 32004L0018 - Classic (3rd generation) | Annex II.A | ANNEX II
SERVICES REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1(2)(d)
ANNEX II A(1)
(1) In the event of any difference of interpretation between the CPV and the CPC, the CPC nomenclature will apply.
Category No, Subject, CPC Reference No (1), CPV Reference No
1 Maintenance and repair services - 6112, 6122, 633, 886 - From 50100000 to 50982000 (except for 50310000 to 50324200 and 50116510-9, 50190000-3, 50229000-6, 50243000-0)
2 Land transport services (2), including armoured car services, and courier services, except transport of mail - 712 (except 71235), 7512, 87304 - From 60112000-6 to 60129300-1 (except 60121000 to 60121600, 60122200-1, 60122230-0), and from 64120000-3 to 64121200-2
3 Air transport services of passengers and freight, except transport of mail - 73 (except 7321) - From 62100000-3 to 62300000-5 (except 62121000-6, 62221000-7)
4 Transport of mail by land (3) and by air - 71235, 7321 - 60122200-1, 60122230-0 62121000-6, 62221000-7
5 Telecommunications services - 752 - From 64200000-8 to 64228200-2, 72318000-7, and from 72530000-9 to 72532000-3
6 Financial services: (a) Insurance services, (b) Banking and investment services (4) - ex 81, 812, 814 - From 66100000-1 to 66430000-3 and from 67110000-1 to 67262000-1 (4)
7 Computer and related services - 84 - From 50300000-8 to 50324200-4, From 72100000-6 to 72591000-4 (except 72318000-7 and from 72530000-9
to 72532000-3)
8 Research and development services (5) - 85 - From 73000000-2 to 73300000-5 (except 73200000-4, 73210000-7, 7322000-0)
9 Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services - 862 - From 74121000-3 to 74121250-0
10 Market research and public opinion polling services - 864 - From 74130000-9 to 74133000-0, and 74423100-1, 74423110-4
11 Management consulting services (6) and related services - 865, 866 - From 73200000-4 to 73220000-0, From 74140000-2 to 74150000-5 (except 74142200-8), and 74420000-9, 74421000-6, 74423000-0, 74423200-2, 74423210-5, 74871000-5, 93620000-0
12 Architectural services; engineering services and integrated engineering services; urban planning and landscape engineering services; related scientific and technical consulting services; technical testing and analysis services - 867 - From 74200000-1 to 74276400-8, and from 74310000-5 to 74323100-0, and 74874000-6
13 Advertising services - 871 - From 74400000-3 to 74422000-3 (except 74420000-9 and 74421000-6)
14 Building-cleaning services and property management services - 874, 82201 to 82206 - From 70300000-4 to 70340000-6, and from 74710000-9 to 74760000-4
15 Publishing and printing services on a fee or contract basis - 88442 - From 78000000-7 to 78400000-1
16 Sewage and refuse disposal services; sanitation and similar services - 94 - From 90100000-8 to 90320000-6, and 50190000-3, 50229000-6, 50243000-0
(1) CPC Nomenclature (provisional version), used to define the scope of Directive 92/50/EEC.
(2) Except for rail transport services covered by category 18.
(3) Except for rail transport services covered by category 18.
(4) Except financial services in connection with the issue, sale, purchase or transfer of securities or other financial instruments, and central bank services. Also excluded: services involving the acquisition or rental, by whatever financial procedures, of land, existing buildings, or other immovable property or concerning rights thereon; nevertheless, financial services supplied at the same time as, before or after the contract of acquisition or rental, in whatever form, shall be subject to this Directive.
(5) Except research and development services other than those where the benefits accrue exclusively to the contracting authority for its
use in the conduct of its own affairs on condition that the service provided is wholly remunerated by the contracting authority.
(6) Except arbitration and conciliation services. | | 32004L0017 - Utilities (3rd generation) | Annex XVII.A | ANNEX XVII A (1)
SERVICES WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 31
(1) In the event of any difference of interpretation between the CPV and the CPC, the CPC nomenclature will apply.
1 Maintenance and repair services - 6112, 6122, 633, 886 - From 50100000 to 50982000 (except for 50310000 to 50324200 and 50116510-9, 50190000-3, 50229000-6, 50243000-0)
2 Land transport services (2), including armoured car services, and courier services, except transport of mail - 712 (except 71235), 7512, 87304 - From 60112000-6 to 60129300-1 (except 60121000 to 60121600, 60122200-1, 60122230-0), and from 64120000-3 to 64121200-2
3 Air transport services of passengers and freight, except transport of mail - 73 (except 7321) - From 62100000-3 to 62300000-5 (except 62121000-6, 62221000-7)
4 Transport of mail by land (2) and by air - 71235, 7321 - 60122200-1, 60122230-0, 62121000-6, 62221000-7
5 Telecommunications services - 752 - From 64200000-8 to 64228200-2, 72318000-7, and from 72530000-9 to 72532000-3
6 Financial services: (a) Insurances services, (b) Banking and investment services (3) ex 81, 812, 814 - From 66100000-1 to 66430000-3 and From 67110000-1 to 67262000-1 (3)
7 Computer and related services - 84 - From 50300000-8 to 50324200-4, From 72100000-6 to 72591000-4 (except 72318000-7 and from 72530000-9 to 72532000-3)
8 Research and development services (4) - 85 - From 73000000-2 to 73300000-5 (except 73200000-4, 73210000-7, 7322000-0)
9 Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services - 862 - From 74121000-3 to 74121250-0
10 Market research and public opinion polling services - 864 - From 74130000-9 to 74133000-0, and 74423100-1, 74423110-4
11 Management consulting services (5) and related services - 865, 866 - From 73200000-4 to 73220000-0, From 74140000-2 to 74150000-5 (except 74142200-8), and 74420000-9, 74421000-6, 74423000-0, 74423200-2, 74423210-5, 74871000-5, 93620000-0
12 Architectural services; engineering services and integrated engineering services; urban planning and landscape engineering services; related scientific and technical consulting services; technical testing and analysis services - 867 - From 74200000-1 to 74276400-8, and From 74310000-5 to 74323100-0, and 74874000-6
13 Advertising services - 871 - From 74400000-3 to 74422000-3 (except 74420000-9 and 74421000-6)
14 Building-cleaning services and property management services - 874, 82201 to 82206 - From 70300000-4 to 70340000-6, and From 74710000-9 to 74760000-4
15 Publishing and printing services on a fee or contract basis - 88442 - From 78000000-7 to 78400000-1
16 Sewage and refuse disposal services; sanitation and similar services - 94 From 90100000-8 to 90320000-6, and 50190000-3, 50229000-6, 50243000-0
(1) CPC Nomenclature (provisional version), used to define the scope of Directive 93/38/EEC.
(2) Except for rail transport services covered by category 18.
(3) Except financial services in connection with the issue, sale, purchase or transfer of securities or other financial instruments, and central bank services. Also excluded: services involving the acquisition or rental, by whatever financial procedures, of land, existing buildings, or other immovable property or concerning rights thereon; nevertheless, financial services supplied at the same time as, before or after the contract of acquisition or rental, in whatever form, shall be subject to this Directive.
(4) Except research and development services other than those where the benefits accrue exclusively to the contracting authority for its use in the conduct of its own affairs on condition that the service provided is wholly remunerated by the contracting authority.
(5) Except arbitration and conciliation services. | | 32008R213 - Sixth joint amendment of Classic and Utilities (3rd generation) | Article 2.2+VI=U3-XVII.A, 3.2+VI=C3-II.A | Article 2 Directive 2004/17/EC is amended as follows:
.....
2. The table set out in Annex XVIIA is replaced by the text set out in Annex VI to this Regulation.
Article 3 Directive 2004/18/EC is amended as follows: 1. The table set out in Annex I is replaced by the text set out in Annex V to this Regulation.
.....
2. In Annex II, the table set out in Annex IIA is replaced by the text set out in Annex VI to this Regulation.
ANNEX VI (1)
Category No Subject CPC reference No (1) CPV reference No
(1) In the event of any difference of interpretation between the CPV and the CPC, the CPC nomenclature will apply.
1 Maintenance and repair services 6112, 6122, 633, 886 From 50100000-6 to 50884000-5 (except for 50310000-1 to 50324200-4 and 50116510- 9, 50190000-3, 50229000-6, 50243000-0), and from 51000000-9 to 51900000-1
2 Land transport services (2), including armoured car services, and courier services, except transport of mail 712 (except 71235), 7512, 87304 From 60100000-9 to 60183000-4 (except 60160000-7, 60161000-4, 60220000-6), and from 64120000-3 to 64121200-2
3 Air transport services of passengers and freight, except transport of mail 73 (except 7321) From 60410000-5 to 60424120-3 (except 60411000-2, 60421000-5), and 60500000-3, and from 60440000-4 to 60445000-9
4 Transport of mail by land (2) and by air 71235, 7321 60160000-7, 60161000-4 60411000-2, 60421000-5
5 Telecommunications services 752 From 64200000-8 to 64228200-2 72318000-7, and from 72700000-7 to 72720000-3
6 Financial services: (a) Insurance services (b) Banking and investment services (3) ex 81, 812, 814 From 66100000-1 to 66720000-3 (3)
7 Computer and related services 84 From 50310000-1 to 50324200-4 from 72000000-5 to 72920000-5 (except 72318000-7 and from 72700000-7 to 72720000-3), 79342410-4
8 Research and development services (4) 85 From 73000000-2 to 73436000-7 (except 73200000-4, 73210000-7, 73220000-0
9 Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services 862 From 79210000-9 to 79223000-3
10 Market research and public opinion polling services 864 From 79300000-7 to 79330000-6, and 79342310-9, 79342311-6
11 Management consulting services (5) and related services 865, 866 From 73200000-4 to 73220000-0 from 79400000-8 to 79421200-3 and 79342000-3, 79342100-4 79342300-6, 79342320-2 79342321-9, 79910000-6, 79991000-7 98362000-8
12 Architectural services; engineering services and integrated engineering services; urban planning and landscape engineering services; related scientific and technical consulting services; technical testing and analysis services 867 From 71000000-8 to 71900000-7 (except 71550000-8) and 79994000-8
13 Advertising services 871 From 79341000-6 to 79342200-5 (except 79342000-3 and 79342100-4
14 Building-cleaning services and property management services 874, 82201 to 82206 From 70300000-4 to 70340000-6, and from 90900000-6 to 90924000-0
15 Publishing and printing services on a fee or contract basis 88442 From 79800000-2 to 79824000-6, and from 79970000-6 to 79980000-7
16 Sewage and refuse disposal services; sanitation and similar services 94 From 90400000-1 to 90743200-9 (except 90712200-3), from 90910000-9 to 90920000-2 and 50190000-3, 50229000-6 50243000-0
(1) CPC Nomenclature (provisional version), used to define the scope of Directive 92/50/EEC.
(2) Except for rail transport services covered by category 18.
(3) Except financial services in connection with the issue, sale, purchase or transfer of securities or other financial instruments, and central bank services. Also excluded: services involving the acquisition or rental, by whatever financial procedures, of land, existing buildings, or other immovable property or concerning rights thereon; nevertheless, financial services supplied at the same time as, before or after the contract of acquisition or rental, in whatever form, shall be subject to this Directive.
(4) Except research and development services other than those where the benefits accrue exclusively to the contracting authority and/or contracting entity for its use in the conduct of its own affairs on condition that the service provided is wholly remunerated by the contracting authority and/or contracting entity. (5) Except arbitration and conciliation services. | | 31992L0050 - Services (2nd generation) | Annex I.A | ANNEX I A
Services within the meaning of Article 8
>TABLE> | | 31993L0038 - Utilities (2nd generation) | Annex XVI.A | ANNEX XVI
A
SERVICES IN THE SENSE OF ARTICLE 15
/* Tables: see OJ */ |
| Case | Pte | Ref | Text | C-411/00
Swoboda | 45-53 | S2-10
S2-IA
S2-IB | 45. Directive 92/50 pursues fundamentally the same object as the directives on the coordination of the procedures for the award of public works and supply contracts, which is, according to the settled case-law of the Court, to avoid the risk of preference being given to national tenderers or candidates whenever a contract is awarded by the contracting authorities and the possibility that a body financed or controlled by the State, regional or local authorities, or other bodies governed by public law may choose to be guided by considerations other than economic ones (see, to that effect, Case C-44/96 Mannesmann Anlagenbau Austria [1998] ECR I-73, paragraph 33, Case C-360/96 BFI Holding [1998] ECR I-6821, paragraphs 42 and 43, and Case C-380/98 University of Cambridge [2000] ECR I-8035, paragraph 17). However, Directive 92/50 does not apply in the same way to all public service contracts.
46. Thus, the 21st recital in the preamble to Directive 92/50 states that the application of its provisions in full must be limited, for a transitional period, to contracts for services where its provisions will enable the full potential for increased cross-border trade to be realised, the contracts for other services during that period being subject only to monitoring.
47. To that end Directive 92/50 makes a distinction between contracts for services referred to in Annex I A, which under Article 8 are awarded in accordance with the provisions of Titles III to VI, and those for services referred to in Annex I B, which under Article 9 are subject to the provisions of Articles 14 and 16.
48. In Article 10, Directive 92/50 also provides that contracts which have as their object services listed in both Annex I A and Annex I B are to be awarded in accordance with the provisions of Titles III to VI where the value of the services listed in Annex I A exceeds the value of the services listed in Annex I B, and where this is not the case only in accordance with Articles 14 and 16.
49. It follows from those provisions that in the context of Directive 92/50 the argument that the main purpose of a contract determines the regime applicable to it cannot be accepted.
50. In the first place, Directive 92/50 itself states, in the seventh recital in the preamble, that for the application of procedural rules and for monitoring purposes the field of services is best described by subdividing it into categories corresponding to particular positions of a common classification, in this case the CPC nomenclature.
51. In paragraph 37 of the judgment in Tögel, the Court held that the reference made in Annexes I A and I B to Directive 92/50 to the CPC nomenclature was binding.
52. In the second place, Article 10 of Directive 92/50 provides an unequivocal test for the determination of the regime applicable to a contract composed of several services, which is based on the comparison of the value of the services referred to in Annex I A to the directive with the value of the services referred to in Annex I B.
53. In the light of the preceding observations, the answer to the first question must be that the determination of the regime applicable to public service contracts composed partly of services falling within Annex I A to Directive 92/50 and partly of services falling within Annex I B to the directive does not depend on the main purpose of those contracts and is to be made in accordance with the unequivocal test laid down by Article 10 of that directive. | C-411/00
Swoboda | 55-60 | S2-10
S2-IA
S2-IB | 55. In that regard, it suffices to observe that the answer given to the first question makes it clear that the classification of services in Annexes I A and I B to Directive 92/50 - even in the context of a contract with a single object - is in accordance with the system provided for by the directive as it appears, inter alia, in the seventh and 21st recitals in the preamble and in Articles 8 and 10, which envisage the application of the directive on two levels.
56. Directive 92/50 must be interpreted as in no way requiring the separate award of a contract for the services referred to in Annex I B thereto when, in accordance with the classification made by reference to the CPC nomenclature, the value of those services exceeds, for the contract in question, the value of the services referred to in Annex I A. As the Advocate General observed in point 55 of his Opinion, to require such a separation in that case would effectively deprive Article 10 of Directive 92/50 of any purpose. Under the second sentence of Article 10 of the directive the contract is subject only to Articles 14 and 16.
57. It would be the same if the contracting authority artificially grouped in one contract services of different types without there being any link arising from a joint purpose or operation, with the sole purpose of increasing the proportion of the services referred to in Annex I B to Directive 92/50 in the contract and thus of avoiding, by way of the second sentence of Article 10, the application of its provisions in full.
58. Moreover, that conclusion is supported by the wording of Article 7(3) of Directive 92/50, from which it is clear that the choice of the valuation method is not to be made with the intention of avoiding the application of the directive. Although that article relates to a different situation (the artificial splitting up of the contract), the purpose which inspires it (the concern to avoid any risk of manipulation) also precludes a contracting authority from artificially grouping different services in the same contract solely in order to avoid the application in full of the directive to that contract.
59. In the main case there can be no question, however, of such an artificial grouping in so far as the Bundesvergabeamt has clearly established that the services forming the object of the contract awarded by the ANB, although different in nature, all serve to achieve a single purpose.
60. In the light of the preceding observations, the answer to the second and fourth questions must be that in the award of a contract with a single object but composed of several services, the classification of those services in Annexes I A and I B to Directive 92/50, far from depriving it of its effectiveness, is in accordance with the system laid down by the directive. When, following the classification thus made by reference to the CPC nomenclature, the value of the services falling within Annex I B exceeds the value of the services falling within Annex I A, there is no obligation on the part of the contracting authority to separate from the contract in question the services referred to in Annex I B and to award separate contracts in respect of them. | C-411/00
Swoboda | 62-66 | S2-10
S2-IA
S2-IB | 62. In that regard, it must be observed that the classification of services in Annexes I A and I B to Directive 92/50 is primarily a question of fact for the contracting authority to determine, subject to review by the national courts.
63. In the present case, it is thus for the national court to review the classification made by the ANB, taking account, in particular, of the principles laid down in paragraphs 49 to 51 of the present judgment. The Bundesvergabeamt must verify, more particularly, that the services which make up the contract and the reference numbers of the CPC nomenclature correspond.
64. However, the Commission's argument that Category 20 of Annex I B to Directive 92/50, on supporting and auxiliary transport services, can be interpreted as covering the whole of the services forming the object of the contract in the main proceedings must in any case be rejected.
65. It follows from the title of that category that the services to which it refers do not include the transportation itself. In that regard, it is common ground that land transport services fall within Category 2 of Annex I A to Directive 92/50, with the exception of postal services and rail services, covered by Category 4 of Annex I B and Category 18 of Annex I B respectively.
66. In the light of those considerations, the answer to the third question must be that it is for the national court to determine the regime applicable to the contract forming the object of the procedure at issue in the main proceedings on the basis of Article 10 of Directive 92/50, in particular by verifying that the services which make up that contract and the reference numbers of the CPC nomenclature correspond. In any case, Category 20 of Annex I B to Directive 92/50 cannot be interpreted as also including land transport services themselves, as they are explicitly covered by Category 2 of Annex I A to the Directive. | C-258/97
Hospital Ingenieure | 29-32 | S2-I.A | 29 By its fourth question the referring body seeks to ascertain whether services such as those with which the defendant's invitation to tender was concerned fall within Category No 12 of Annex I A to Directive 92/50.
30 Category No 12 of Annex I A to Directive 92/50 comprises architectural services, engineering services and integrated engineering services, urban planning and landscape architectural services, related scientific and technical consulting services and technical testing and analysis services.
31 For the reasons given by the Advocate General in point 25 of his Opinion, it is clear that services such as those with which the defendant's invitation to tender is concerned fall within Category No 12 of Annex I A to Directive 92/50. 32 The answer to the fourth question must therefore be that services of the kind with which the defendant's invitation to tender is concerned, namely tasks relating to the preparation and execution of projects for the construction of a paediatric clinic in a hospital and the corresponding medical facilities, fall within Category No 12 of Annex I A to Directive 92/50. | C-76/97
Tögel | 29-30 + 35-40 | S2-10
S2-II.A
S2-IIB
P2X1-1 | 29 By the first part of the third question the national court asks whether services consisting in the transport of injured and sick persons with a nurse in attendance, which are the services at issue in the main proceedings, come within Annex I A or Annex I B to Directive 92/50, to which Article 10 of that directive refers.
30 As regards the designation of the services governed by contracts covered by Directive 92/50, Articles 8 and 9 thereof refer to respectively Annex I A and Annex I B to that directive. In that connection, both Annex I A and Annex I B to Directive 92/50 refer to the CPC nomenclature.
35 In that connection, it should be observed that, according to Article 1(3) of Regulation No 3696/93, the classification provided for in the CPA must be used for statistical purposes and that, according to point 1 of Recommendation 96/527, the CPV is intended only to be used for the drawing up of notices and other communications published in connection with public tendering procedures.
36 It follows that the designations of services listed in Category No 2 of Annex I A and Category No 25 of Annex I B cannot be interpreted in the light of the CPA or the CPV.
37 On the other hand, as Advocate General Fennelly observes at paragraph 32 of his Opinion, the seventh recital in the preamble to Directive 92/50 clearly indicates that the reference in Annexes I A and I B to the CPC nomenclature is binding.
38 It must be observed next that, as Advocate General Fennelly explains more fully at paragraphs 36 to 48 of his Opinion, the global approach advocated by France at the hearing, which consists in allocating each service in its entirety to either Annex I A or Annex I B depending on the presence or absence of medical assistance, does not reflect the clear distinction in the Annexes between transport and medical services delivered in the ambulance.
39 Consequently, CPC reference number 93 appearing in Category No 25 (Health and social services) in Annex I B, clearly indicates that this category relates solely to the medical aspects of health services governed by a public contract such as the one at issue in the main proceedings, to the exclusion of the transport aspects, which come under Category No 2 (Land transport services), which have the CPC reference number 712.
40 The reply to be given to the first part of the third question must therefore be that services consisting in the transport of injured and sick persons with a nurse in attendance come within both Annex I A, Category No 2, and Annex I B, Category No 25, to Directive 92/50, so that a contract for those services is covered by Article 10 of Directive 92/50. |
| Case | Pte | Ref | Text | N-080710
European Land Solutions | 18+K5 | C3-2.transp
C3-20-impl
C3-21-impl
C3-II.A
C3-II.B | Ad påstand 6
18. Med den bemærkning, at indklagede ikke har handlet, som om der var tale om et udbud omfattet af Bilag II B, og den fejlagtige klassificering således ikke har haft betydning, tages påstanden til følge.
.....
K5. Ad påstand 6 Indklagede har handlet i strid med Udbudsdirektivet ved i udbudsbekendtgørelsen at anføre, at den udbudte tjenesteydelse tilhører kategori 27 »andre ydelser« og dermed er omfattet af bilag II B, idet den udbudte tjenesteydelse tilhører kategori 16 »Kloakering og affaldsbortskaffelse: rensning og lignende tjenesteydelser« og dermed er omfattet af bilag IIA. | N-050503
Taxa Stig | 1-2 | S2-10
S2-I.A
S2-I.B | 1. Klagenævnet udtalte i præmisserne i kendelserne af 8. april 2003 og 28. april 2003 bl.a. følgende:
[Identical quotes as set out below:
N-030428, Centralforeningen af Taxiforeninger i Danmark: 2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-9
N-030408, Dansk Taxi Forbund: 2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-9]
2. Af de grunde, som Klagenævnet har anført i kendelserne af 8. april 2003 og 28. april 2003, tager Klagenævnet påstand 1 til følge.
.....
K1. Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falck Redningskorps A/S om siddende patienttransport i Vestsjællands Amt for perioden 2002 – 2007 uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet. | N-030428
Centralforeningen af Taxiforeninger i Danmark | 2 | S2-10-impl
S2-I.A
S2-I.B | 2. Henvisningen i Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I, A og bilag I, B til CPCnomenklaturen må fortolkes som en henvisning til De Forende Nationers CPC-nomenklatur (fælles vareklassifikation), som den var gældende på tidspunktet for vedtagelsen af Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet i 1992. En fortolkning af henvisningen i de nævnte bilag som en henvisning til »det til enhver tid gældende CPC-nomenklatur« ville indebære, at det blev overladt til De Forenede Nationer at ændre gældende EU-udbudsregler. I 7. betragtning i præambelen 6 til Rådets direktiv 92/50/EØF af 18. juni 1992 er det da også forudsat, at der senere kan blive behov for, at fællesskabet foretager ændringer i henvisningerne i de anførte bilag til CPC-nomenklaturen. | N-030428
Centralforeningen af Taxiforeninger i Danmark | 3-4+K2 | S2-10
S2-I.A
S2-I.B | 3. I overensstemmelse med EF-domstolens dom af 24. september 1998 – sag C-76/97 (Tögel) skal det vurderes, om tjenesteydelsen (1) akut ambulancekørsel består af tjenesteydelser af forskellig beskaffenhed, og Klagenævnet lægger efter det oplyste til grund, at tjenesteydelsen (1) akut ambulancekørsel dels består af »landtransport«, som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.A., kategori 2, (»landtransport«), jf. CPC-nomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 712), dels består af »behandling«, (»general and specialized medical services delivered in the ambulance«), som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.B., kategori 25 (»social- og sundhedsvæsen «), jf. CPC-nomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 93192). Dette indebærer, at Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets artikel 10 om aftaler, der omfatter flere tjenesteydelser, hvoraf en eller flere er omfattet af artikel 8, og en eller flere tjenesteydelser er omfattet af artikel 9, finder anvendelse.
4. Klagenævnet har ikke anmodet indklagede om mere præcise oplysninger om den økonomiske værdi af henholdsvis den tjenesteydelser, der er omfattet af artikel 8, og den tjenesteydelse, der er omfattet af artikel 9, idet Klagenævnet anser det for sikkert, at udgifterne til transporten af personer (»landtransport«) væsentligt overstiger udgifterne til den præhospitale indsats (»sundheds- og socialvæsen«), der udøves under den akutte ambulancekørsel. Det følger herefter af artikel 10, at tjenesteydelsen isoleret betragtet skulle have været i EU-udbud. Indklagede har således handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet som anført i spørgsmål 4.
.....
K2. Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om akut ambulancekørsel i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EUudbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.
[Spørgsmål 4 Spørgsmålet om indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet, ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om akut ambulancekørsel i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.] | N-030428
Centralforeningen af Taxiforeninger i Danmark | 5-6+K3 | S2-10
S2-I.A
S2-I.B | 5. I overensstemmelse med EF-domstolens dom af 24. september 1998 – sag C-76/97 (Tögel) skal det vurderes, om tjenesteydelsen (2) liggende patienttransport består af tjenesteydelser af forskellige beskaffenhed, dels af »landtransport«, som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.A., kategori 2 (»landtransport«), jf. CPC-nomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 712), dels består af »behandling« (»general and specialized medical services delivered in the ambulance«), som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.B., kategori 25 (»social- og sundhedsvæsen«), jf. CPC-nomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 93192).
6. Indklagede har oplyst, at der under liggende patienttransport udføres medicinsk observation og iltbehandling m.v. Dette indbærer, at Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets artikel 10 finder anvendelse. Klagenævnet anser det for sikkert, at udgifterne til »landtransport« væsentligt overstiger udgifterne til »socialog sundhedsvæsen«, og tjenesteydelsen (2) liggende patienttransport skulle således isoleret betragtet have været i EU-udbud. Indklagede har således handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet som anført i spørgsmål 5.
.....
K3. Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om liggende patienttransport i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.
[Spørgsmål 5 Spørgsmålet om indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet, ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om liggende patienttransport i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.] | N-030428
Centralforeningen af Taxiforeninger i Danmark | 7-9+K1 | S2-10-impl
S2-I.A
S2-I.B-impl | 7. Under henvisning til det, der er anført ad spørgsmål 4 og 5 skulle såvel tjenesteydelsen (1) akut ambulancekørsel som tjenesteydelsen (2) liggende patienttransport have været i EU-udbud, og det samme gælder (3) siddende patienttransport, som alene omfatter »transport af personer«, jf. CPCnomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 712), jf. Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.A., kategori 2 »landtransport«. Klagenævnet tager derfor denne påstand til følge.
8. Det er under parternes procedure vedrørende påstand 1 på mødet den 8. november 2002 i sagen vedrørende klagen fra Dansk Taxi Forbund af begge parter forudsat, at der alene kunne undlades EU-udbud vedrørende tjenesteydelse (3) siddende patienttransport, der isoleret betragtet skal i EU-udbud, såfremt indklagede uden at handle i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet kunne beslutte, at der skulle indgås en samlet kontrakt om alle de 3 tjenesteydelser, og såfremt værdien af tjenesteydelse (1) og (2), som ikke skulle EU-udbud, oversteg værdien af tjenesteydelse (3), eller værdien af tjenesteydelse (1), som ikke isoleret skulle i EU-udbud, oversteg den samlede værdi af tjenesteydelse (2) og tjenesteydelse (3). Det følger af det, der er anført ad spørgsmål 4 og spørgsmål 5, at tjenesteydelse (1) og tjenesteydelse (2) begge isoleret skulle have været i EU-udbud, og parternes procedure på mødet har således bygget på den forkerte forudsætning, at i hvert fald tjenesteydelse (1) ikke isoleret skulle i EU-udbud. Klagenævnet har imidlertid fundet det hensigtsmæssigt desuagtet at tage stilling til, om indklagede i den konkrete situation ville have været berettiget til at beslutte at indgå en samlet kontrakt om alle 3 tjenesteydelser og gennemføre et samlet EU-udbud om alle 3 tjenesteydelser. Ved besvarelsen af dette spørgsmål forudsætter Klagenævnet således, at indklagede ville gennemfører et samlet EU-udbud vedrørende alle 3 tjenesteydelser.
9. Indklagede har i en længere årrække haft en kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S, som omfattede alle 3 tjenesteydelser, og efter oplysningerne om baggrunden for at indklagede i 2001 ønskede denne praksis fortsat, har indklagede haft saglige grunde til at træffe beslutning om fortsat at have én kontrakt om alle 3 tjenesteydelser. Indklagede ville således ikke have handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet, hvis indklagede havde besluttet at indgå en samlet kontrakt vedrørende alle 3 tjenesteydelser og derefter have gennemført et EU-udbud vedrørende alle 3 tjenesteydelser med henblik på at indgå en sådan samlet kontrakt.
Herefter bestemmes:
K1. Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om siddende patienttransport i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet. | N-030408
Dansk Taxi Forbund | 2 | S2-10-impl
S2-I.A
S2-I.B | 2. Henvisningen i Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I, A og bilag I, B til CPCnomenklaturen må fortolkes som en henvisning til De Forende Nationers CPC-nomenklatur (fælles vareklassifikation), som den var gældende på tidspunktet for vedtagelsen af Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet i 1992. En fortolkning af henvisningen i de nævnte bilag som en henvisning til »det til enhver tid gældende CPC-nomenklatur« ville indebære, at det blev overladt til De Forenede Nationer at ændre gældende EU-udbudsregler. I 7. betragtning i præamblen til Rådets direktiv 92/50/EØF af 18. juni 1992 er det da også forudsat, at der senere kan blive behov for, at fællesskabet foretager ændringer i henvisningerne i de anførte bilag til CPC-nomenklaturen. | N-030408
Dansk Taxi Forbund | 3-4+K2 | S2-10
S2-I.A
S2-I.B | 3. I overensstemmelse med EF-domstolens dom af 24. september 1998 – sag C-76/97 (Tögel) skal det vurderes, om tjenesteydelsen (1) akut ambulancekørsel består af tjenesteydelser af forskellig beskaffenhed, og Klagenævnet lægger efter det oplyste til grund, at tjenesteydelsen (1) akut ambulancekørsel dels består af »landtransport«, som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.A., kategori 2, (»landtransport«), jf. CPC-nomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 712), dels består af »behandling«, (»general and specialized medical services delivered in the ambulance«), som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.B., kategori 25 (»social- og sundhedsvæsen «), jf. CPC-nomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 93192). Dette indebærer, at Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets artikel 10 om aftaler, der omfatter flere tjenesteydelser, hvoraf en eller flere er omfattet af artikel 8, og en eller flere tjenesteydelser er omfattet af artikel 9, finder anvendelse.
4. Klagenævnet har ikke anmodet indklagede om mere præcise oplysninger om den økonomiske værdi af henholdsvis den tjenesteydelser, der er omfattet af artikel 8, og den tjenesteydelse, der er omfattet af artikel 9, idet Klagenævnet anser det for sikkert, at udgifterne til transporten af personer (»landtransport«) væsentligt overstiger udgifterne til den præhospitale indsats (»sundheds- og socialvæsen«), der udøves under den akutte ambulancekørsel. Det følger herefter af artikel 10, at tjenesteydelsen isoleret betragtet skulle have været i EU-udbud. Indklagede har således handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet som anført i spørgsmål 4.
.....
K2. Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om akut ambulancekørsel i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EUudbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.
[Spørgsmål 4 Spørgsmålet om indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet, ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om akut ambulancekørsel i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.] | N-030408
Dansk Taxi Forbund | 5-6+K3 | S2-10
S2-I.A
S2-I.B | 5. I overensstemmelse med EF-domstolens dom af 24. september 1998 – sag C-76/97 (Tögel) skal det vurderes, om tjenesteydelsen (2) liggende patienttransport består af tjenesteydelser af forskellige beskaffenhed, dels af »landtransport«, som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.A., kategori 2 (»landtransport«), jf. CPC-nomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 712), dels af »behandling« (»general and specialized medical services delivered in the ambulance«), som henhører under Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.B., kategori 25 (»social- og sundhedsvæsen«), jf. CPCnomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 93192).
6. Indklagede har oplyst, at der under liggende patienttransport udføres medicinsk observation og iltbehandling m.v. Dette indbærer, at Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets artikel 10 finder anvendelse. Klagenævnet anser det for sikkert, at udgifterne til »landtransport« væsentligt overstiger udgifterne til »socialog sundhedsvæsen«, og tjenesteydelsen (2) liggende patienttransport skulle således isoleret betragtet have været i EU-udbud. Indklagede har således handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet som anført i spørgsmål 5.
.....
K3. Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om liggende patienttransport i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.
[Spørgsmål 5 Spørgsmålet om indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet, ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om liggende patienttransport i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet.] | N-030408
Dansk Taxi Forbund | 7-9+K1 | S2-10-impl
S2-I.A
S2-I.B-impl | 7. Under henvisning til det, der er anført ad spørgsmål 4 og 5 skulle såvel tjenesteydelsen (1) akut ambulancekørsel som tjenesteydelsen (2) liggende patienttransport have været i EU-udbud, og det samme gælder (3) siddende patienttransport, som alene omfatter »transport af personer«, jf. CPCnomenklaturen (CPC-referencenummer 712), jf. Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I.A., kategori 2 »landtransport«. Klagenævnet tager derfor denne påstand til følge.
8. Det var under parternes procedure vedrørende påstand 1 på mødet den 8. november 2002 af begge parter forudsat, at der alene kunne undlades EUudbud vedrørende tjenesteydelse (3) siddende patienttransport, der isoleret betragtet skal i EU-udbud, såfremt indklagede uden at handle i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet kunne beslutte, at der skulle indgås en samlet kontrakt om alle de 3 tjenesteydelser, og såfremt værdien af tjenesteydelse (1) og (2), som ikke skulle EU-udbud, oversteg værdien af tjenesteydelse (3), eller værdien af tjenesteydelse (1), som ikke isoleret skulle i EU-udbud, oversteg den samlede værdi af tjenesteydelse (2) og tjenesteydelse (3). Det følger af det, der er anført ad spørgsmål 4 og spørgsmål 5, at tjenesteydelse (1) og tjenesteydelse (2) begge isoleret skulle have været i EU-udbud, og parternes procedure på mødet har således bygget på den forkerte forudsætning, at i hvert fald tjenesteydelse (1) ikke isoleret skulle i EU-udbud. Klagenævnet har imidlertid fundet det hensigtsmæssigt desuagtet at tage stilling til, om indklagede i den konkrete situation ville have været berettiget til at beslutte at indgå en samlet kontrakt om alle 3 tjenesteydelser og gennemføre et samlet EU-udbud om alle 3 tjenesteydelser. Ved besvarelsen af dette spørgsmål forudsætter Klagenævnet således, at indklagede ville gennemfører et samlet EU-udbud vedrørende alle 3 tjenesteydelser.
9. Indklagede har i en længere årrække haft en kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S, som omfattede alle 3 tjenesteydelser, og efter oplysningerne om baggrunden for at indklagede i 2001 ønskede denne praksis fortsat, har indklagede haft saglige grunde til at træffe beslutning om fortsat at have én kontrakt om alle 3 tjenesteydelser. Indklagede ville således ikke have handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet, hvis indklagede havde besluttet at indgå en samlet kontrakt vedrørende alle 3 tjenesteydelser og derefter have gennemført et EU-udbud vedrørende alle 3 tjenesteydelser med henblik på at indgå en sådan samlet kontrakt.
Herefter bestemmes:
K1. Indklagede har handlet i strid med Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet ved den 20. december 2001 at indgå kontrakt med Falcks Redningskorps A/S om siddende patienttransport i Vestsjællands Amt uden forinden at gennemføre EU-udbud efter Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet. | N-990920
JyllandsPosten | 1-5 | S2-1.a
S2-8
S2-I.A | 1. Det følger af Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets artikel 1, a), at optagelse mod betaling af annoncer fra en offentlig myndighed er en tjenesteydelse i direktivets forstand. Afgørende for, om der er udbudspligt efter direktivet vedrørende optagelse af sådanne annoncer, er herefter, om optagelsen er omfattet af opregningen i direktivets bilag I A, jf. direktivets artikel 8. Den eneste kategori i bilag I A, der kan komme på tale, er kategori 13 om »Reklamevirksomhed «. Om denne kategori kan finde anvendelse, må afhænge af forståelsen af CPC–glossarets punkt 871, til hvilket der henvises i bilaget ud for kategori 13.
2. CPC–glossaret, der er udfærdiget af De Forenede Nationer, sigter ikke på at give en beskrivelse af de tjenesteydelser, der skal udbydes i henhold til Tjenesteydelsesdirektivet, men har efter det foreliggende til formål at etablere en internationalt ensartet produktnomenklatur til brug for statistiske sammenligninger. Henvisningerne til CPC–glossaret i Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I A og I B må forstås på denne baggrund.
3. Det må antages, at henvisningen til CPC–glossarets punkt 871 ud for kategori 13 i Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I A ikke sigter til den blotte optagelse af annoncer, men derimod til den tjenesteydelse, der består af planlægning, udarbejdelse og formidling af annoncering m.m., og som typisk udøves af reklamebureauer. Denne forståelse er den mest nærliggende ud fra CPC–glossarets tekst. Forståelsen bestyrkes endvidere af, at glossaret anvender ordet »soliciting« om nogle af ydelserne under punkt 871, og af, at der i den franske version af Rådsforordning nr. 3696/93 anvendes betegnelsen »services des agences publicitaires« om nogle af disse ydelser.
4. Det må således antages, at den blotte optagelse af annoncer ikke er omfattet af Tjenesteydelsesdirektivets bilag I A og dermed heller ikke af udbudspligten i henhold til direktivet, jf. dettes artikel 8. I konsekvens heraf må det endvidere antages, at en offentlig myndigheds indgåelse af rabat– og prisaftaler med et annoncemedium ikke er omfattet af udbudspligten i henhold til direktivet.
5. Allerede som følge heraf tages klagen ikke til følge. |
|
|
