Remove 2014 Remove Thresholds Remove Transparency
article thumbnail

European Court of Auditors publishes report on public procurement

Telles.eu

As several objectives of the 2014 reform remain unattained, we conclude that, the entry into force of the 2014 directives has had no demonstrable effect. (…) Also, as publication rates remain low, transparency, a key safeguard against the risk of fraud and corruption, is negatively affected. Its deadline was 18 April 2019.

article thumbnail

Looking into Antonio Costa legacy as PM from a procurement perspective

Telles.eu

The transposition of the 2014 Directives His first government transposed the 2014 Directives fashionably late in August 2017. As for the 2017 transposition I do not have much to say, but I did say a lot about what was happening below-thresholds. But fashionably late it was nonetheless. Personal data on base.gov.pt

professionals

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Updating the UNCITRAL Model Procurement Law for “Green Procurement”

Public Procurement Intl

Both the European Union ( Directive 2014/24/EU , Art. One solution would be to bring Article 10 into line with Article 43 of EU Directive 2014/24/EU , to ensure that eco-labels: (a) concern only “criteria which are linked to the subject-matter of the contract and are appropriate to define characteristics.

article thumbnail

Red Eagle v. Colombia: Colombia’s Decisions to Protect Páramos Do Not Constitute a Violation of the Minimum Standard of Treatment vis-à-vis an Investor with No Vested Right

Kluwer Arbitration

In December 2014, Colombia’s national environmental authority issued Resolution 2090 , delimiting the Santurbán Páramo in an almost identical area as the one contained in the 2007 Páramo Atlas, which overlapped with the area of Red Eagle’s mining titles. Mr. Martínez de Hoz, an arbitrator in this case, dissented.

Balance 52
article thumbnail

Red Eagle v. Colombia: Colombia’s Decisions to Protect Páramos Do Not Constitute a Violation of the Minimum Standard of Treatment vis-à-vis an Investor with No Vested Right

Kluwer Arbitration

In December 2014, Colombia’s national environmental authority issued Resolution 2090 , delimiting the Santurbán Páramo in an almost identical area as the one contained in the 2007 Páramo Atlas, which overlapped with the area of Red Eagle’s mining titles. Mr. Martínez de Hoz, an arbitrator in this case, dissented.

Balance 52
article thumbnail

The Faith of the Fair and Equitable Treatment Clause in Africa

Kluwer Arbitration

Such framing sets a higher threshold for establishing a violation of FET. In 2014, South Africa terminated its BITs with six European countries and in 2015 passed the Protection of Investment Act (“PIA”) , which will eventually replace all BITs. See e.g., PSEG v Turkey , ICSID Case No. ARB/02/5, Award , ¶ 240; Infinito Gold Ltd.

Balance 52
article thumbnail

An In-Depth Examination of Inflation Relief for a Government Contractor

Procurement Notes

18] And, for DoD, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (“DFARS”) 216.203-4 limits the use of the FAR EPA clauses to DoD contracts that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (presently $250,000 with exceptions), and performance is longer than six months. [19] GAO’s competitive prejudice threshold should be similar.