Geo Quinot was kind enough to invite me to contribute a chapter to his upcoming edited book ‘A Research Agenda for Public Procurement Law, Policy and Regulation’ (Edward Elgar Publishing). The aim of the book is to identify important new research directions in public procurement, and I’m happy I got to write the remedies and dispute resolution chapter.

There are many important issues there that need to be addressed, but it seems to me the most important ones are – appeal fees and private arbitration with no public law and public interest safeguards.

Appeal fees limit the possibility to submit appeals, and private arbitration makes it very difficult for someone on the outside to know what is happening with a contract dispute. Therefore, both limit post-award transparency. And I think we need more transparency here. My solution is to eliminate appeal fees and institute public law safeguards in public procurement arbitration. The Remedies Directive is due an revision soon, hopefully this is something that will be considered.

I can already hear the knives sharpening, so I’ll get some 🍿 and wait for your comments!!

Here is the abstract:

Public procurement procedures are complex procedures for a reason-simplicity and speed lead to too much discretion, and too much discretion tends to lead to opaque procurement practices and possibly to corruption. In this context, effective review of public procurement procedures and transparency is essential. This chapter will examine two apparently non-related issues in procurement law and practice that have (in the author’s view) a detrimental effect on transparency after contract award: appeal fees as a tool to limit the possibility of submitting public procurement appeals and private arbitration as a public procurement contract performance dispute resolution tool. The author will approach these issues from an EU perspective, but the conclusions translate well beyond the continent.

The paper is available here.

Uncategorized