The case (Sof Medica S.A. v Spitalul Clinic Județean de Urgență Cluj‑Napoca) concerned a Romanian hospital procurement for a surgical robot. The contracting authority’s technical specifications required a modular, mobile robotic system with independent robotic arms suitable for operating rooms without major structural changes. Sof Medica, offering a different robotic system, argued the requirements were so specific they effectively excluded competing technologies and favoured a particular solution
Court’s findings
No obligation to justify every specification in advance
EU law does not require the contracting authority to set out a full objective justification for each technical specification in the contract notice or tender documents.
However, specifications must be clear, precise, and unambiguous so that reasonably informed tenderers can understand them in the same way.
Transparency and equal treatment
The transparency principle applies to the drafting of specifications, not to the provision of a detailed justification for each requirement.
Specifications must not discriminate or restrict competition unjustifiably.
“Or equivalent” requirement
Under Article 42 of Directive 2014/24/EU, when a contracting authority refers to a type or specific production in technical specifications, it must add “or equivalent” unless the reference is justified by the nature of the need and the impossibility of using equivalent solutions. This ensures that equivalent products are not excluded without objective reasons.
Definition of need
The Court stressed that the “definition of need” must be based on objective criteria and cannot be used to justify specifications that effectively favour a particular supplier.
Practical implications
- Draft specifications clearly and precisely.
- If referencing a specific product type, include “or equivalent” unless justified.
- Avoid post‑publication justification that could be used to exclude tenderers without prior transparency.