Skip to content

Liability threshold for damages in public procurement: The EFTA Court’s Fosen-Linjen Saga

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)511–521
Number of pages11
JournalNorthern Ireland Legal Quarterly
Issue number4
DateAccepted/In press - 21 Oct 2019


In this case comment, I explore the two EFTA Court Judgments in the Fosen-Linjen saga and their opposing views on the interaction between EU/EEA rules on procurement remedies and the more general principle of State liability for breaches of EU/EEA law. I review the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and, in particular, the perceived inconsistencies between the two 2010 Judgments in Strabag and Spijker, which featured very prominently in the legal arguments submitted to the EFTA Court in both Fosen-Linjen cases. I also use the benchmark of the UK Supreme Court's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Judgment to support the view that Spijker reflects the correct understanding of EU/EEA law and that there should be no further debate about it. I submit that the Court of Justice of the European Union would be well-advised to (re)confirm the position enshrined in Spijker at the earliest opportunity, to avoid any perpetuation of this debate in the context of EU/EEA public procurement law.

    Research areas

  • public procurement, public enforcement, private enforcement, effectiveness, causation, simple breach, sufficiently serious breach, State liability, damages, liability

    Structured keywords

  • LAW Centre for Law and Enterprise

Download statistics

No data available



  • Full-text PDF (final published version)

    Rights statement: This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Queen's University at Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.

    Final published version, 148 KB, PDF document


View research connections

Related faculties, schools or groups