EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-631/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof’s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands) lodged on 14 October 2021 — Taxi Horn Tours BV v Gemeente Weert, Gemeente Nederweert, Touringcars VOF

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CN0631

62021CN0631

October 14, 2021
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

17.1.2022

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/18

(Case C-631/21)

(2022/C 24/24)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Taxi Horn Tours BV

Respondents: Gemeente Weert, Gemeente Nederweert, Touringcars VOF

Questions referred

1.If collaborating persons (natural persons and/or legal persons) operate a joint undertaking (in this case in the form of a general partnership):

must each of the collaborating persons then submit a separate European Single Procurement Document; or

must each of the collaborating persons and their joint undertaking then submit a separate European Single Procurement Document; or

does only the joint undertaking need to submit one European Single Procurement Document?

2.Does it make a difference in this regard:

whether the joint undertaking is temporary or not temporary (enduring);

that the collaborating persons are themselves economic operators;

that the collaborating persons operate their own undertakings which are similar to the joint undertaking, or at least are active in the same market;

that the joint undertaking is not a legal person;

that the joint undertaking may have (recoverable) assets that are separate (from the assets of the partners);

whether the joint undertaking has the authority under national law to represent the collaborating persons in answering the questions of the European Single Procurement Document;

that under national law, in the case of a general partnership, it is the partners who assume the obligations arising from the contract and are jointly and severally liable for fulfilling them (and not therefore the general partnership itself)?

3.If several of the factors mentioned under 2 are significant, how do they relate to each other? Are certain factors more significant than other factors or even of decisive significance?

4.Is it correct that, in the case of a joint undertaking, a separate European Single Procurement Document is in any event required from a collaborating person if the execution of the contract will (also) involve the use of resources that belong to that person’s own undertaking (such as staff and business assets)?

5.Does the joint undertaking have to meet certain requirements in order to be considered a single economic operator? If so, what are those requirements?

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia