(AGENPARL) – Rome, 16 May 2024
(AGENPARL) – Thu 16 May 2024 Press office
COMPETITION FOR TENDER EXPERT:
THE RANKING LIST IS VALIDATED
MUNICIPALITY OF SPOLETO
The ruling of the TAR of Umbria following the appeal presented by
one of the competitors
The ranking of the competition announced by the Municipality of Spoleto for the hiring of is valid
full-time and permanent job of a competition expert. This is the sentence in a nutshell
pronounced on May 7th by the First Section of the Administrative Court
Regional (TAR) for Umbria, composed of the President, Drafter, Pierfrancesco Ungari,
Daniela Carrarelli, First Referendary and Davide De Grazia, First Referendary.
The appeal, presented by one of the participants in the competition, effectively contested the
managerial determination n. 1987/2023 with which the ranking was approved,
“complaining, in relation to defects of violation of the art. 14 of the tender notice and defect of
motivation” the failure to recognize the work activities carried out since 2010 in one
in-house company and the consequent non-awarding of 5 points for service qualifications.
The issue, as argued by the appellant, specifically concerned non-
equalization of the work, for the purposes of attributing service titles, carried out in such
society with that carried out in public administration.
The appellant filed at a later time, after being hired by the Municipality of
Spoleto of the second place following the withdrawal of the winner, the reasons
added by extending the dispute also to managerial determination no. 51/2024.
The Municipality of Spoleto, represented and defended by the lawyer Monica Picena, has appeared
in court essentially requesting the rejection of the appeals, as unfounded (also the
contestant hired promptly counter-argued for inadmissibility and
the unfoundedness of the appeals).
The TAR of Umbria, rejecting the appeal and the additional reasons and confirming the
validity of the final ranking drawn up by the Municipality of Spoleto at the end
of the insolvency proceedings, explained that “in-house companies remain distinct from
public administrations in the strict sense, as well as their respective working relationships”, not
thus allowing the attribution of the score requested by the appellant.
