Official Journal of the European Union

C 225/42

(Case C-564/11) (<span class="super">1</span>)

(Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Public contracts - Directive 2004/18/EC - Article 1(2)(a) and (d) - Services - Study and technical and scientific consultancy for the purposes of drawing up the measures forming a municipal town and country planning programme - Contract concluded between two public entities, one of which is a university - Public entity capable of being classified as an economic operator)

2013/C 225/71

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Consulta Regionale Ordine Ingegneri della Lombardia, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Brescia, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Como, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Cremona, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Lecco, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Lodi, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Milano, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Pavia, Ordine degli Ingegneri della Provincia di Varese

Respondent: Comune di Pavia

In the presence of: Università degli Studi di Pavia

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Consiglio di Stato — Interpretation of Article 1(2)(a) and (d), Article 2 and Article 28 of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114), and of Categories 8 and 12 of Annex II thereto — Award of a public procurement contract outwith the procurement procedures provided for under that directive — Contract entered into by two public administrative authorities, under which the supplier of services is a university and the consideration is in essence non-remunerative

Operative part of the order

European Union public procurement law precludes national legislation under which public entities may, without issuing an invitation to tender, enter into a contract establishing mutual cooperation, where — this being for the referring court to determine — the purpose of such a contract is not to ensure the performance of a public service task incumbent upon all those entities, or where that contract is not governed solely by considerations and requirements relating to the pursuit of objectives in the public interest, or where that contract is of such a nature as to place a private provider of services in a position of advantage vis-à-vis its competitors.

(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 73, 10.3.2012