competitive dialogue – a french perspective françois lichère professor of public law university...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Competitive dialogue – a French perspective
François LichèreProfessor of public lawUniversity of Aix-Marseille
![Page 2: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Introduction Competitive dialogue (CD) has been the only new award
procedure introduced with the last reform of the directives on public procurement (2004) namely the Directive 2004/18 on public sector contracts
The directive 2004/17 on utilities contracts does not encompass such a procedure as it permits the free use of negotiated procedure
CD bridges the gap between open and restricted procedures which do not allow negotiations and the negotiated procedure
France has used the CD on many occasions
![Page 3: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
1. Scope of application1.1 Free recourse to competitive dialogue
below the European thresholds Different thresholds regarding works or
services Examples of use of CD : computer services ; tax
collection services and PPPs for works The way the value is calculated can in theory
have an impact on the ability to use CD ; less impact in practice (big projects at stake)
Different ways of calculating the estimated value in different Member States
![Page 4: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
1. Scope of application
1.2 The conditions of complexity above the European thresholds
Alternative conditions : public contractors: “Are not objectively able to define the technical
means in accordance with Article 23(3)(b),(c) or (d), capable of satisfying their needs or objectives, and/or
Are not objectively able to specify the legal and/or financial make-up of a project”
![Page 5: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
1. Scope of application
Very few challenges in France regarding these conditions as opposed to numerous challenges regarding the award procedures The reason can be found in the need for flexibility that firms
support ; the existence of a previous similar award procedure (call for performance) ; the advice of the official experts for PPPs (MAPPP) that would « secure » the recourse of CD
At least one case has led the court to conclude that there was a technical complexity
No case law regarding the financial and legal make up of the contract
![Page 6: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
1. Scope of application
The flexible interpretation of the scope in theory and in practice In theory: although an exception, competitive dialogue can
be justified on several occasions CD really is an exception to open and restricted procedures French statute law: inability for the public contractor to define the
means alone and in advance / objective lack of knowledge? Examples of technical complexity and financial complexity in legal
literature
In practice: The positive attitude of the MAPPP
Statistics: CD used in almost 90 % of the PPP projects and very few negative opinions by the MAPPP
Question: lack of objectivity by the MAPPP? The possibility of setting up a complex project
![Page 7: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
2. The operation of the award procedure: main issues 2.1 The ability to exclude a candidate during the dialogue phase
The ambiguous wording of the directive: ability to reduce « solutions »
The inability to ask a candidate to submit a final offer different from his solutions The risk of cherry picking The use of award criteria
![Page 8: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
2. The operation of the award procedure: main issues2.2 The ability to adapt the award
procedure during the dialogue phase The adaptation of the award criteria
An explicit possibility set by the statute law on PPPs
A restrictive interpretation by the case law of the Conseil d’Etat-CE 24.11.2004
The adaptation of requirements: a flexible interpretation for CD-CE 24.6.2011
![Page 9: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
2. The operation of the award procedure: main issues2.3 The question of post tender
modifications The possibility to confirm commitments
Purpose: avoid costly financial proposals Uncertainty : is a partial tender possible? Is a new
offer possible? The solution: generalisation of compensations as it
is the case in France for PPPs with « significant investments by the candidates »
The possibility to clarify aspects of the tender
![Page 10: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
2. The operation of the award procedure: main issues2.3 The question of confidentiality
Avoided in theory
Still reluctance in practice
![Page 11: Competitive dialogue – a French perspective François Lichère Professor of public law University of Aix-Marseille](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082815/56649e035503460f94aef02a/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Conclusion CD has shown efficiency to adapt the
demand to the offer although time consuming The operation of CD is more transparent than
negotiated procedure, both in the regulations and in practice (internal competitive dialogue rules)
There is still a lack of certainty for certain aspects of the scope and of the procedure
The current reform could extend the scope of this procedure and use it as an example for the revision of the negotiated procedure