IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00615147.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Les recours en matière de marchés publics en France et aux Etats-Unis : une analyse juridique et économique / Remedies in the Field of Public Procurement Law in France and in the USA: a Legal and Economic Comparison

Author

Listed:
  • François Lichère

    (GREDIAUC - Groupe de Recherches et d'Etudes en Droit de l'Immobilier, de l'Aménagement, de l'Urbanisme et de la Construction - AMU - Aix Marseille Université)

  • Frédéric Marty

    () (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, OFCE - Observatoire Français des Conjonctures économiques - Institut d'Études Politiques [IEP] - Paris - Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques [FNSP])

Abstract

Public procurement law is designed to ensure that public procurement contracts are awarded in an open and fair way, and to avoid the possibility that public authorities might be tempted to choose contractors for "political" reasons (such as political parties' funding corporations, local or national firms, etc...). These formal rules governing contracting might also be seen as a way to ensure competition between firms and to impede, or limit, the risk of illegal collusion during a public procurement award process . This last raison d'être helps to explain why, for example, France has a longstanding tradition of regulating public procurement awards which extends back to at least the Nineteenth century . US rules are more recent than French rules, but nevertheless are quite developed. US Government contracting rules are set forth in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). Department of Defense's (DoD) contracts must be compliant with - the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements (DFARs). Under these rules, three procedures are available for the awarding of public contracts. The first one involves a sealed-bid auction, the second involves a negotiated scheme (which might or might not be competitive) and the third involves a simplified procedure. Agencies are permitted to use the third option for very specific goods and services (commercial items) or if the amount does not exceed a given threshold. Our purpose, in this article, is to analyze, from both a comparative law perspective and a law and economics one, decided cases dealing with the awarding of public contracts. Particular emphasis is placed on the GAO's bid protest system, and the jurisprudence of the French Council of State (supreme administrative court).

Suggested Citation

  • François Lichère & Frédéric Marty, 2011. "Les recours en matière de marchés publics en France et aux Etats-Unis : une analyse juridique et économique / Remedies in the Field of Public Procurement Law in France and in the USA: a Legal and Econ," Post-Print hal-00615147, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00615147 Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00615147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00615147/document
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Langen, Peter W. & van der Lugt, Larissa M., 2006. "Chapter 5 Governance Structures of Port Authorities in the Netherlands," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 109-137, January.
    2. Mary R. Brooks & Athanasios A. Pallis, 2008. "Assessing port governance models: process and performance components," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 411-432, August.
    3. Wang, James J. & Ng, Adolf Koi-Yu & Olivier, Daniel, 2004. "Port governance in China: a review of policies in an era of internationalizing port management practices," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 237-250, July.
    4. Baird, Alfred J, 1995. "Privatisation of trust ports in the United Kingdom: Review and analysis of the first sales," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 135-143, April.
    5. T. Heaver & H. Meersman & E. Van De Voorde, 2001. "Co-operation and competition in international container transport: strategies for ports," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 293-305, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00615147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.