Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Damages in EU Public Procurement Law pp 205–223Cite as

The Iridescence of the Lost Chance Doctrine in Damages Claims

  • Chapter

  • 505 Accesses

Part of the book series: Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation ((SEELR,volume 6))

Abstract

The availability of procurement damages is best in jurisdictions that make use of the lost chance doctrine. The lost chance could provide a solution from a functional point of view to the problem of the hypothetical nature of aggrieved bidders’ losses. This chapter surveys different understandings of the lost chance theory, namely as an autonomous loss, an alleviation of the burden of proof and as a proportional liability. It examines the general stance of the selected legal systems on the lost chance and in the area of public procurement particularly. The conclusions investigate the potential for a fruitful application of the lost chance doctrine in the EU public procurement context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    JT Oskierski, Schadensersatz im Europäischen Recht : Eine vergleichende Untersuchung des Acquis Communautaire und der EMRK (Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2010).

  2. 2.

    See, eg W Müller-Stoy, Schadensersatz für verlorene Chancen - Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität zu Freiburg, 1973), p 124, relying on Möller, below n 3.

  3. 3.

    H Möller, Summen- und Einzelschaden. Beiträge zur Erneuerung der Schadenslehr vom Wirtschaftsrecht aus (Berlin, de Gruyter, 1937), p 124.

  4. 4.

    Möller distinguishes these ‘becoming patrimonies’ as ‘Anwartschaftsbeziehungen’ and sharply differentiates them from mere chances. This distinction is based on degree, as ‘Anwartschaften’ are likely, and chances are merely possible. In Müller-Stoy, Schadensersatz für verlorene Chancen – Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung, above n 2, p 124.

  5. 5.

    I Vacarie, ‘La perte d’une chance’, (1987) Revue de la Recerche Juridique 903, p 905 and fn 6.

  6. 6.

    P Jourdain, J Ghestin & M Billau, Traité de droit civil / T.II Les obligations 4e Partie Les conditions de la responsabilité (Libraire Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 1998), p 74, citing case of 17 July 1889 Cour de cassation.

  7. 7.

    As observed, eg, by V Tacchini-Laforest, ‘Reflexions à propos de la perte de chances’, (1999) Petites Affiches 7, p 7, B.2.b: (‘La position de la jurisprudence et d’une partie de la doctrine à légard de la perte d’une chance n’est pas exempte de paradoxe’).

  8. 8.

    The area of medical law is particularly interesting for the comparison of civil and administrative jurisdictions. Similar cases reached different jurisdictions depending on whether injuries were sustained in public or private hospitals.

  9. 9.

    For greater detail on this distinction between administrative and civil jurisdictions, see J Boucher & B Bourgeouis-Machureau, ‘Indemnisation de la perte de chances: le Conseil d’Etat poursuit sa conversion au probabilisme’, (2008) Acutalité Juridique Droit Administratif 135.

  10. 10.

    Tacchini-Laforest, ‘Reflexions à propos de la perte de chances’, above n 7, A.1., citing, eg Cass Civ 1re, 8 juillet 1997, J.C.P. 1997, II, 22921.

  11. 11.

    ‘Das Chancenproblem ist in Frankreich offenbar auf dieser fließenden Grenze anzusiedeln, weil die Zerstörung einer Chance zwar sicher (“actuel et certain”), ihre Realisierung aber zweifelhaft (“éventuel et hypothétique”) ist. Demgemäß wird “la perte d’une chance” durchweg im Abschnitt über die “Certitude du dommage” behandelt’ [translation by the author, footnote with doctrinal references omitted]. See also W Müller-Stoy, Schadensersatz für verlorene Chancen - Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung, above n 2, p 7.

  12. 12.

    JURISCLASSEUR, Civil Code 14 juin 1999, ‘Art. 1382 à 1386 > Fasc. 202-1-3: RÉGIME DE LA RÉPARATION’ (LexisNexis 28 October 2010).

  13. 13.

    ‘une fraction de la perte subie’ [translation by the author]. Ibid, listing relevant case law.

  14. 14.

    Hoge Raad, 24 October 1997, NJ 1998, 257 (Baijings/Mr. H.).

  15. 15.

    J Spier, T Hartlief, GE van Maanen & RD Vriesendorp, Verbintenissen uit de wet en Schadevergoeding (Deventer, Kluwer, 2006), p 217, with references to case law.

  16. 16.

    ibid, p 218. One of the most famous examples is the Baby Ruth case, in which a late diagnosis negatively impaired chances of healing. Hof Amsterdam 4 January 1996, NJ 1997, 213.

  17. 17.

    ibid, p 219; and HR 31 March 2006, RvdW 2006, 328.

  18. 18.

    AJ Akkermans, Proportionele aansprakelijkheid bij onzeker causaal verband. Een rechtsvergelijkend onderzoek naar wenselijkheid, grondslagen en afgrenzing van aansprakelijkheid naar rato van veroorzakingswaarschijnlijkheid (Dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, 1997), p 116.

  19. 19.

    ibid, p 219.

  20. 20.

    SD Lindenbergh, Schadevergoeding (Deventer, Kluwer, 2008), pp 52–53. Lindenbergh sees an assured ‘place’ for the lost chance theory in Dutch law, the main question remaining as to in what cases and how exactly one would handle it – in his opinion, with a ‘definite degree of restraint’.

  21. 21.

    See K Péguret, Schadensersatzansprüche übergangener Bieter im Vergaberecht (Dissertation, Jenaer Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, 2010), pp 110–123 for a good summary on the German doctrine, comparing the different factual situations of other areas of law with those of public procurement procedures.

  22. 22.

    §252 BGB – Lost profits: ‘The damage to be compensated for also comprises the lost profits. Those profits are considered lost that in the normal course of events or in the special circumstances, particularly due to the measures and precautions taken, could probably be expected.’

  23. 23.

    Chaplin v Hicks [1911] 2K.B. 786.

  24. 24.

    Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] 2 All ER 909.

  25. 25.

    H Reece, ‘Losses of Chances in the Law’, (1996) 59 The Modern Law Review 188.

  26. 26.

    In a wider survey, Binon states that there is ‘no unanimity’ between the Member States with regard to the acceptance of the lost chance theory. See JM Binon, ‘La Réparation de la Perte d’une Chance Dans la Jurisprudence Européenne : Une Question de Chance ?’, in Liber Amicorum Jean-Luc Fagnart (Bruxelles, Anthemis, 2008), p 380.

  27. 27.

    Jourdain et al, Traité de droit civil, p 78.

  28. 28.

    ibid, p 79.

  29. 29.

    The following case are reverses the case law on the notion of chance: CE, 5 January 2000, Telle.

  30. 30.

    F Lichère, ‘Damages for violation of the EC public procurement rules in France’ (2006) Public Procurement Law Review 171, p 176.

  31. 31.

    ibid, p 177.

  32. 32.

    ibid.

  33. 33.

    Utrecht DC, 4 July 2001, BR 2002/91; and Den Haag 29 March 2000, rolnr. 94/3490, as cited and discussed in EH Pijnacker Hordijk, GW Van der Bend & JF Van Nouhuys, Aanbestedingsrecht. Handboek van het Europese en het Nederlandse Aanbestedingsrecht (Den Haag, Sdu Uitgevers, 2009), p 661.

  34. 34.

    Legislative proposal Vergaberechtsänderungsgesetz (VgRÄG) §135, BT-Drucksache 13/9340, p 9.

  35. 35.

    ibid, p 22. The legislator additionally noted that the terminology had already been introduced by §25 3 (3) VOB/A.

  36. 36.

    R Weyand, Kommentar Vergaberecht. Praxiskommentar zu GWB, VgV, SektVO, VOB/A, VOLA/A, VOF (München, Beck-online 2012), 42.5.

  37. 37.

    Most convincingly C Alexander, ‘GWB § 126 Anspruch auf Ersatz des Vertrauensschadens’, in H Pünder & M Schellenberg (eds), Vergaberecht, 2nd edition (Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2011), rn 32–33.

  38. 38.

    M Burgi, ‘A Report about the German Remedies System’, in S Treumer & F Lichère (eds), Enforcement of the EU Public Procurement Rules (Københanv, Djof Publishing, 2011), p 25.

  39. 39.

    Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Ltd v The Corporate Officer of the House of Commons [1999] EWHC Technology 199 [hereinafter ‘Harmon’] and Harmon CFEM Facades (UK) Ltd v The Corporate Officer of the House of Commons [2000] EWHC Technology 84 [hereinafter ‘Harmon II’].

  40. 40.

    Allied Maples Group v Simmons & Simmons [1995] 3 All ER 907.

  41. 41.

    Oskierski, Schadensersatz im Europäischen Recht, above n 1.

  42. 42.

    ‘En équité, le procédé est peut-etre moins condemnable qu’en logique pure: il aboutit à ces sortes de compromise et de cotes mal taillées qui ne satisfont personne mais appaisent les esprits. On fait deux petites injustices au lieu de risqué d’en faire une grosse. Peut-etre l’ordre social y gagne-t-il’ [translation by the author]. See A Bénabent, La Chance et le Droit (Libraire Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 1973), p 191, fn 4, as cited in Müller-Stoy, Schadensersatz für verlorene Chancen – Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung, above n 2, fn 96.

  43. 43.

    R Savatier, ‘Une faute peut-elle engendrer la responsabilité d’un dommage sans l’avoir causé?’ (1970) Dalloz 123.

  44. 44.

    The process is not about ‘d’établir une statistique générale, mais d’apprécier concrètement un cas particulier’. See R Savatier, ‘Note Cass. civ. 1re, 2 mai 1978, Mandryka c. Franck et autres’ (1978) Juris-Classeur Périodique 18966, citing, eg the condemnation of instituting proportional liability practice by the Cour de Cassation belge 29 september 1974 (1976) Juris-Classeur Périodique II 18216.

  45. 45.

    Müller-Stoy, Schadensersatz für verlorene Chancen - Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung, above n 2.

  46. 46.

    ibid, p 96.

  47. 47.

    Williston, quoted in Müller-Stoy, Schadensersatz für verlorene Chancen - Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung, p 94.

  48. 48.

    Savatier, ‘Une faute peut-elle engendrer la responsabilité d’un dommage sans l’avoir causé?’, above n 43.

  49. 49.

    Reece, ‘Losses of Chances in the Law’, above n 25.

  50. 50.

    I deliberately exclude the lost chance as applied by the General Court in its case law here.

  51. 51.

    G Ajani, L Lesmo, G Boella, A Mazzei & P Rossi, ‘Terminological and Ontological Analysis of European Directives: Multilingualism in Law’, (2007) International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law Journal 43.

  52. 52.

    A Reich & O Shabat, The Remedy of Damages in Public Procurement in Israel and the EU: A Proposal for Reform, SSRN eLibrary (2013) at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2244909, pp 28–29.

  53. 53.

    ibid, 38.

  54. 54.

    LW Gormley, Gordian Knots in European Public Procurement Law: Government Procurement Agreement: Standards, Utilities, Remedies (Koln, Bundesanzeiger, 1997), p 5.

  55. 55.

    See Sect. 11.4.2.

  56. 56.

    In fact, case typologies are fairly common when discussing the lost chance in public procurement. By way of example see R Caranta, ‘Damages: Causation and Recoverable Losses’, in D Fairgrieve & F Lichère (eds), Public procurement law : damages as an effective remedy (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2011) and AJ Akkermans & EH Pijnacker Hordijk, ‘Schadevergoeding en schadeberekening’, in WH van Boom, et al. (eds), Aanbesteding en aansprakelijkheid (Schoordijk Instituut Centrum voor aansprakelijkheid, 2001).

  57. 57.

    The biggest difference in Germany relates to the fact that an aggrieved bidder has to prove that the contract has or would have been awarded. In keeping in line with the ‘private autonomy’ rationale underlying this reasoning, I would defend a reversal of the burden of proof burdening the contracting authority with a rebuttable presumption that indeed it would have awarded a contract.

  58. 58.

    Article 2(7) of Directive 92/13 requires that ‘Where a claim is made for damages representing the costs of preparing a bid or of participating in an award procedure, the person making the claim shall be required only to prove an infringement of Community law in the field of procurement or national rules implementing that law and that he would have had a real chance of winning the contract and that, as a consequence of that infringement, that chance was adversely affected.’

Bibliography

  • Ajani, G, Lesmo, L, Boella, G, Mazzei, A & Rossi, P (2007) ‘Terminological and Ontological Analysis of European Directives: Multilingualism in Law’ International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law Journal 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akkermans, AJ (1997) Proportionele aansprakelijkheid bij onzeker causaal verband. Een rechtsvergelijkend onderzoek naar wenselijkheid, grondslagen en afgrenzing van aansprakelijkheid naar rato van veroorzakingswaarschijnlijkheid (Dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant)

    Google Scholar 

  • Akkermans, AJ & Pijnacker Hordjik, EH (2001) ‘Schadevergoeding en schadeberekening’, in WH van Boom et al, Aanbesteding en aansprakelijkheid (Schoordijk Instituut Centrum voor aansprakelijkheid).

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, C (2011) ‘GWB § 126 Anspruch auf Ersatz des Vertrauensschadens’, in H Pünder & M Schellenberg (eds), Vergaberecht, 2nd edition (Baden-Baden, Nomos).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bénabent, A (1973) La Chance et le Droit (Libraire Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence)

    Google Scholar 

  • Binon, JM (2008) ‘La Réparation de la Perte d’une Chance Dans la Jurisprudence Européenne : Une Question de Chance ?’, in Liber Amicorum Jean-Luc Fagnart (Bruxelles, Anthemis).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boucher, J & Bourgeouis-Machureau, B (2008) ‘Indemnisation de la perte de chances: le Conseil d’Etat poursuit sa conversion au probabilisme’ Acutalité Juridique Droit Administratif 135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgi, M (2011) ‘A Report about the German Remedies System’, in S Treumer & F Lichère (eds), Enforcement of the EU Public Procurement Rules (København, DJØF Publishing).

    Google Scholar 

  • Caranta, R (2011) ‘Damages: Causation and Recoverable Losses’, in D Fairgrieve & F Lichère (eds), Public procurement law: damages as an effective remedy (Oxford, Hart Publishing).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gormley, LW (1997) Gordian Knots in European Public Procurement Law: Government Procurement Agreement: Standards, Utilities, Remedies (Koln, Bundesanzeiger, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jourdain, P, Ghestin, J & Billau, M (1998) Traité de droit civil / T.II Les obligations 4e Partie Les conditions de la responsabilité (Libraire Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichère, F (2006) ‘Damages for violation of the EC public procurement rules in France’ Public Procurement Law Review 171, 176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenbergh, SD (2008) Schadevergoeding (Deventer, Kluwer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Möller, H (1937) Summen- und Einzelschaden. Beiträge zur Erneuerung der Schadenslehr vom Wirtschaftsrecht aus (Berlin, de Gruyter).

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Stoy, W (1973) Schadensersatz für verlorene Chancen - Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität zu Freiburg).

    Google Scholar 

  • Oskierski, JT (2010) Schadensersatz im Europäischen Recht: Eine vergleichende Untersuchung des Acquis Communautaire und der EMRK (Baden-Baden, Nomos).

    Google Scholar 

  • Péguret, K (2010) Schadensersatzansprüche übergangener Bieter im Vergaberecht (Dissertation, Jenaer Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pijnacker Hordijk, EH, van der Bend, GW & Van Nouhuys, JF (2009) Aanbestedingsrecht. Handboek van het Europese en het Nederlandse Aanbestedingsrecht (Den Haag, Sdu Uitgevers).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, A & Shabat, O (2013) ‘The Remedy of Damages in Public Procurement in Israel and the EU: A Proposal for Reform’, 28–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savatier, R (1970) ‘Une faute peut-elle engendrer la responsabilité d’un dommage sans l’avoir causé?’ Dalloz 123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savatier, R (1978), ‘Note Cass. civ. 1re, 2 mai 1978, Mandryka c. Franck et autres’ Juris-Classeur Périodique 18966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spier, J, Hartlief, T, van Maanen, GE & Vriesendorp, RD (2006) Verbintenissen uit de wet en Schadevergoeding (Deventer, Kluwer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tacchini-Laforest, V (1999) ‘Reflexions à propos de la perte de chances’ Petites Affiches 7, 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vacarie, I (1987) ‘La perte d’une chance’ Revue de la Recerche Juridique 903, 905.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyand, R (2012) Kommentar Vergaberecht. Praxiskommentar zu GWB, VgV, SektVO, VOB/A, VOLA/A, VOF (München, Beck-online).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law, European University Institute, Florence, Italy

    Hanna Schebesta

  2. Law & Governance Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Hanna Schebesta

Authors
  1. Hanna Schebesta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schebesta, H. (2016). The Iridescence of the Lost Chance Doctrine in Damages Claims. In: Damages in EU Public Procurement Law. Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation, vol 6. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23612-4_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation