Municipality awards concession without tender
A municipality in Geneva decided not to put out a tender for the award of a concession for billboard advertising. The concession has now been revoked.
advertisement
the essentials in brief
- Lancy did not put out a call for tenders for a concession for billboard advertising.
- therefore, the Federal Supreme Court is now revoking the concession.
- The municipality had violated fundamental legal provisions.
That federal court hat die granting of a concession for billboard advertising in a Geneva municipality. The authority refrains from an invitation to tender and thus violates fundamental legal provisions.
In this specific case, the municipality of Lancy granted a company with a meeting in Zurich the concession to put up posters in its municipality for the period from 2020 to 2029. The agreement replaced the previous concession from 2004, according to a ruling by the federal court published on Wednesday.
The community granted the concession, without first having made a tender. Nor did they inform another bill-posting company based in Geneva, which had contacted the authority several times. She had stated that she wanted to apply for a new award for the concession. After the award, the Geneva company was simply presented with a fait accompli.
Federal Supreme Court holds a leading decision
That federal court Hat held in a leading decision, that the concession is void. The legal deficiency in the award weighs extremely heavily. The community was aware of the irregularity. The same applies to the Zurich company, which was confronted with the same questions in another legal proceeding.
In their verdict, the Lausanne judges also support the decision of the lower court in Geneva. According to this, the municipality WILL be given a period of six months to carry out a correct allocation. Another option is to include billposting in their own area of responsibility again.
The correct awarding of the concession in accordance with the provisions of the Internal Market Act does not constitute an interference with the municipal autonomy. They also state this.
More on the subject: