Germany: Reduced protection of trade and business secrets in procurement procedures!

In brief

A recent decision of the European Court of Justice, which also deals with the protection of trade and business secrets of companies in procurement procedures, is currently leading to changes in the practice of German public procurement chambers in granting access to files and forwarding documents. More recently, we have observed in several proceedings before various review bodies that information marked as confidential has been disclosed to other parties because contracting authorities or procurement chambers have not recognized the alleged need for protection.


The decision of the European Court of Justice is based on a legal dispute over the award of a project development contract in Poland (judgment of 17.11.2022 in Case C-54/21 "Antea"). In the review proceedings brought against the award of the contract, the applicant company requested, inter alia, the disclosure of certain documents and information from the tenders of competing bidders, which they had marked as trade and business secrets. The applicant justified this demand by stating that the disclosure — in particular of references, subcontractors and execution concepts — was necessary because without appropriate knowledge the applicant's own application for review could not be formulated effectively. The applicant company also accused the contracting authority of having violated public procurement law because the alleged confidentiality and need for protection of this information — which was merely marked as a "trade and business secret" and not substantiated beyond that — had been accepted without reflection and the applicant had not been able to do so with this blanket justification, access was denied.

Against this background, the European Court of Justice has made a number of practically significant statements in its decision about the proper handling of confidential information relevant to the offer under public procurement law. One of the most important findings is that contracting authorities may not automatically follow the mere assurances of tenderers that certain information provided would constitute trade and business secrets to be treated as confidential and may refuse to disclose and pass on to other parties to the proceedings simply by referring to this allegation. Instead, bidders would have to justify the actual confidentiality of certain documents and information in detail and contracting authorities would have to demand appropriate evidence for this. For example, the economic value and competitive relevance of the information in question, its protection by an intellectual property right or aspects of public interest may be important here. If this substantiated evidence is not provided convincingly, the documents and information concerned must be made available to other interested parties requesting disclosure.

According to this, according to the latest case law of the European Court of Justice, a simple marking of sensitive bid components as "trade and business secrets" will no longer be sufficient to ensure confidentiality vis-à-vis competitors in procurement procedures. In particular, when inspecting the file in review proceedings, there is now a risk that the contents of the offer will be made available to competitors contrary to the declared will of the company concerned. This shall apply even if these documents have been marked as trade and business secrets. This is nothing more and nothing less than a departure from a permanent practice that has been widely established and generally accepted (not only) in Germany since the beginning of EU/GWB public procurement law, on which companies have been able to rely so far.

The first public procurement chambers and contracting authorities have already taken up this new development and have begun to pass on appropriately marked information in tenders and pleadings without redacting, with reference to this decision of the European Court of Justice, without first giving the tenderer concerned the opportunity to comment in detail. In order to protect confidential information in the best possible way, participants in procurement procedures must therefore now take special measures.

We invite you to discuss this impact on your participation in procurement procedures with us in a half-hour online seminar and will be happy to arrange an individual date for this.

Click here to access the German version.

Copyright © 2024 Baker & McKenzie. All rights reserved. Ownership: This documentation and content (Content) is a proprietary resource owned exclusively by Baker McKenzie (meaning Baker & McKenzie International and its member firms). The Content is protected under international copyright conventions. Use of this Content does not of itself create a contractual relationship, nor any attorney/client relationship, between Baker McKenzie and any person. Non-reliance and exclusion: All Content is for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal and regulatory developments. All summaries of the laws, regulations and practice are subject to change. The Content is not offered as legal or professional advice for any specific matter. It is not intended to be a substitute for reference to (and compliance with) the detailed provisions of applicable laws, rules, regulations or forms. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any action or refraining from taking any action based on any Content. Baker McKenzie and the editors and the contributing authors do not guarantee the accuracy of the Content and expressly disclaim any and all liability to any person in respect of the consequences of anything done or permitted to be done or omitted to be done wholly or partly in reliance upon the whole or any part of the Content. The Content may contain links to external websites and external websites may link to the Content. Baker McKenzie is not responsible for the content or operation of any such external sites and disclaims all liability, howsoever occurring, in respect of the content or operation of any such external websites. Attorney Advertising: This Content may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. To the extent that this Content may qualify as Attorney Advertising, PRIOR RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE A SIMILAR OUTCOME. Reproduction: Reproduction of reasonable portions of the Content is permitted provided that (i) such reproductions are made available free of charge and for non-commercial purposes, (ii) such reproductions are properly attributed to Baker McKenzie, (iii) the portion of the Content being reproduced is not altered or made available in a manner that modifies the Content or presents the Content being reproduced in a false light and (iv) notice is made to the disclaimers included on the Content. The permission to re-copy does not allow for incorporation of any substantial portion of the Content in any work or publication, whether in hard copy, electronic or any other form or for commercial purposes.