A comparative study of the impact of violations of public law on concluded public contracts

A highly interesting and controversial question in the regulation of public contracts is what follows in that situation where a contract has been concluded unlawfully, that is, in breach of those rules of public nature that regulate the contractual activity of public authorities. Will a contract lose or limit its initial effects, and, if so, under what circumstances, who can challenge the effects of such contracts and, how are the various conflicting interests involved balanced? The answer to these questions is of crucial importance for the integrity of any public procurement regulatory system, and consequently the realization of many of their policy objectives. By using comparative and contextual legal analysis of several selected jurisdictions, this thesis identifies, conceptualises and systematises the practical and policy considerations surrounding the treatment of unlawfully concluded public contracts. The analysis conducted attempts to systematically present the difficult balance between the various conflicting interests and multifaceted regulatory issues that arise in the context of unlawfully concluded public contracts. The thesis suggests that a careful balance between the public and private interest is essential for the treatment of such contracts and proposes a roadmap of regulatory and policy considerations that legal systems may wish to reflect upon when dealing with this issue