Upphandling av konst - undantag av konstnärliga skäl

Sammanfattning: The regulations of public procurement in the European Union (EU) consist primarily of two directives, 2004/18/EG and 2004/17/EG. These directives are principally based on the internal market provisions of the EC Treaty (now the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) and are aiming to guarantee competition within the EU. The directives prescribe in detail how a procurement process should be performed and how the procuring public authority or entity is allowed to act. According to the aim of guaranteeing competition the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination should be taken into consideration within all procurements. This implies that all potential suppliers within the member states in the EU should be treated equally and should be given the same conditions within each procurement process. All procurements should also be characterized by transparency. This implies for example that all procurements in general should be made public through a contract notice, in order to enable for all potential suppliers to show their interests of participating in the procurement process. In certain cases the directives provide exceptions from the procurement regulations. The requirement of publishing a contract notice can for example be ignored due to artistic reasons. This exception can only be used when the authority can show that only one supplier can meet the demands. The authority is under such circumstances allowed to contact the current supplier without performing a regular procurement process. During the last few years this exception has been object for trial both within the Administrative Court of Appeal and the Supreme Administrative Court. Common for the cases where the exception was accepted were that the authority had shown adequate reasons for using the exception. The exception has also been object for trial within the EU court. Though not in consideration of artistic reasons but in consideration of other reasons admitting the same exception. In these cases the EU court stated that the exception should be applied restrictively and only in exceptional cases. The fact that the Swedish courts require reasonable grounds for using the exception is probably an expression for the restrictiveness stated by the EU-court. Due to that matter the interpretation of the Swedish courts seems to be compatible with the EU regulations. Despite of this theoretical compatibility it can be discussed whether these situations where the exception was accepted really are meant to be covered by the exception or if the Swedish courts in this aspect have made an interpretation that can be criticized.