Administrative, Public contracts, works contracts, temporary grouping of companies, Cons. Stato Sez V, 2 August 2024, Judgment no. 6944
On the legitimacy of the exclusion of a temporary grouping of companies if there is an exclusionary cause that concerns one of its members, unknown to the other members, which occurred before the deadline for submitting offers
Public contracts and public administration obligations – Works contract – Tender – Temporary grouping of companies – Participation requirements – Exclusion – Good faith – Expulsion and replacement of the principal
If, before the submission of the offer, an excluding cause occurs in relation to one of its components, the temporary grouping of companies is required to communicate to the contracting authority, when submitting the offer, the excluding cause and the subject who is interested and to prove the exclusion or replacement with another person with the necessary requirements, without prejudice to the substantial unchangeability of the offer presented or the impossibility of adopting such measures before the presentation of the offer. (1).
Public contracts and public administration obligations – Works contract – Tender – Temporary grouping of companies – Participation requirements – Exclusion – Good faith
– Expulsion and replacement of the principal
If, before the submission of the offer, an excluding cause occurs in relation to one of its components, the temporary grouping of companies is required to communicate to the contracting authority, when submitting the offer, the excluding cause and the subject who is interested and to prove the exclusion or replacement with another person with the necessary requirements, without prejudice to the substantial unchangeability of the offer presented or the impossibility of adopting such measures before the presentation of the offer. (1).
Public contracts and public administration obligations – Works contract – Tender – Temporary grouping of companies – Participation requirements – Exclusion – Good faith
It must be assumed that the group knows the situation of its members and presents an application for participation that takes each individual’s situation into account. Therefore, the mere declaration of the agent of not being aware of the lack of a participation requirement for a principal and of having learned of its existence only during the verification of the requirements is not in itself sufficient to support the declaration of illegitimacy of the decision to withdraw the award placed in favor of the group itself. (2).
(1) In the compliant sense: T.a.r. for Lazio, section. V, 17 June 2024, n. 12296.
(2) There are no precedents in the exact terms.
Source Administrative Justice
