State Council sez.V 29/12/2009 No 8966
The provisional award of a contract in the nature of endoprocedimentale act, effects still quite unstable and temporary.
It therefore, on the one hand, is unfit to produce the lesion of the company not been awarded, which can actually occur only with the final award, which is not a purely confirmatory of the first ( ex multis, CdS, sect. V, July 20, 2009, No. 4527, November 14, 2008, No. 5691, sect. VI, 25 September 2007 No. 4937), and conversely it is equally unfit to generate in the company provisionally awarded a position of advantage or a reasonable (and innocent) expectation that the final award decision and the subsequent signing of the contract, with the result that ' administration that it intends to exercise its right of self-defense than interim award does not have a specific burden of justification on the grounds of public interest public who have given, it being sufficient that it is made clear the reasoning behind the negative determination, through a statement of the factual and objective basis of which found no award (CdS, sect. IV, 31 May 2007, No 2838), could also take account of the overriding reasons imposed by the need to safeguard the public interest (CdS, sect. IV September 15, 2006, No 5374). JUDGEMENT FULL
0 comments:
Post a Comment