In 2019, the Catalan Competition Authority (ACCO) applied, for the first time, a contracting ban that diverged from the approach of the National Commission on Markets and Competition (CNMC) regarding the specification of its scope and duration. This action has given rise to a legal dispute concerning the interpretation of Article 72 of the Public Sector Contracts Act (LCSP). The ACCO contends, based on the Defence of Competition Act (LDC), that it possesses the authority to define the scope and duration of the ban. However, this position has faced several challenges, including the absence of explicit legal authorization in the LDC, the preventive nature of the ban, and the regulatory relationship between the LDC and the LCSP. Another important function of the ACCO is the evaluation of self-correction measures, which can exempt companies from the ban. These measures require active participation in the penalty procedure and the implementation of corrective labour-related actions. Such requirements may impose disproportionate financial costs, for instance, compensations for unfair dismissals, as the timelines of social jurisdiction procedures and administrative penalty procedures do not always coincide. Finally, the ACCO lacks clear criteria regarding the duration and scope of the contracting ban, which contributes to legal uncertainty.
Fornaris Valls, I. (2025). La interacció entre l’article 72 de la Llei de contractes del sector públic i la Llei de defensa de la competència: un repte per a l’Autoritat Catalana de la Competència en la determinació de la prohibició de contractar per infraccions anticompetitives. REVISTA CATALANA DE DRET PÚBLIC, 71, 123-139 [10.58992/rcdp.i71.2025.4423].
La interacció entre l’article 72 de la Llei de contractes del sector públic i la Llei de defensa de la competència: un repte per a l’Autoritat Catalana de la Competència en la determinació de la prohibició de contractar per infraccions anticompetitives
Fornaris Valls, Ignacio
2025
Abstract
In 2019, the Catalan Competition Authority (ACCO) applied, for the first time, a contracting ban that diverged from the approach of the National Commission on Markets and Competition (CNMC) regarding the specification of its scope and duration. This action has given rise to a legal dispute concerning the interpretation of Article 72 of the Public Sector Contracts Act (LCSP). The ACCO contends, based on the Defence of Competition Act (LDC), that it possesses the authority to define the scope and duration of the ban. However, this position has faced several challenges, including the absence of explicit legal authorization in the LDC, the preventive nature of the ban, and the regulatory relationship between the LDC and the LCSP. Another important function of the ACCO is the evaluation of self-correction measures, which can exempt companies from the ban. These measures require active participation in the penalty procedure and the implementation of corrective labour-related actions. Such requirements may impose disproportionate financial costs, for instance, compensations for unfair dismissals, as the timelines of social jurisdiction procedures and administrative penalty procedures do not always coincide. Finally, the ACCO lacks clear criteria regarding the duration and scope of the contracting ban, which contributes to legal uncertainty.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


