---

The book surveys the enforcement of EU law through the lens of damages claims for violations of EU public procurement rules. The first part clarifies the requirements on damages claims under both public procurement and general EU law, notably the public procurement remedies directives and doctrines such as procedural autonomy, effective judicial protection and Member State liability. The second part focuses on comparative law, covering England, France, Germany and the Netherlands, and provides an overview of national regulation and case law of damages litigation in the area of public procurement. A third part discusses the constitutive and quantification criteria of the damages remedy from a comparative and EU law perspective. It explores the lost chance, which functionally emerges as a compromise capable of mitigating the typically problematic nature of causation and uncertainty in public procurement constellations. The book concludes with a proposal for legislative intervention regarding damages in public procurement.

---

1 Introduction.- Part I.- 2 The EU Public Procurement Policy Field.- 3 The CJEU´s Approach to Damages under General EU Law.- 4 Sources of EU Procurement Law and Damages.- Part II.- 5 Case Study: The Netherlands.- 6 Case Study: The United Kingdom.- 7 Case Study: Germany.- 8 Case Study: France.- Part III.- 9 Issue Based Analysis of Public Procurement Damages.- 10 Quantification of Claimable Losses.- 11 The Iridescence of the Lost Chance Doctrine in Damages Claims.- Part IV.- 12 Conclusions.

---

"The reader is ... provided with a well-structured overview and profound analysis of the topic of damage compensation in public procurement settings. This broad perspective is the biggest strength of the book ... . Schebesta makes a sounds [sic] analysis of how the different jurisdictions incorporate this theory and indicates that the French approach by which different qualities of chances (none/serious/very serious) are fixed to categories of claimable losses (none/bid costs/lost profit) seems to work effectively." (Sarah Schoenmaekers, Common Market Law Review, Vol. 53 (4), 2016)

---