Self-Cleaning in Procurement Law

Self-cleaning: measures by an undertaking after a ground for exclusion to restore reliability. Art. 57(6) Directive 2014/24/EU, § 125 GWB, § 83 BVergG 2018.

Definition: Self-cleaning means the right of an economic operator to which a ground for exclusion can be raised, to restore its reliability and continue to participate in procurement procedures by demonstrating appropriate measures – in particular payment of damages, active cooperation with investigating authorities and technical and organisational preventive measures (Art. 57(6) Directive 2014/24/EU).

Last updated: January 2026 · Legal basis: Art. 57(6) Directive 2014/24/EU, § 83 BVergG 2018 (AT), § 125 GWB (DE)

What is self-cleaning?

Self-cleaning is the procurement-law institute that enables an undertaking affected by a ground for exclusion to rehabilitate its integrity and reliability by demonstrating specific corrective measures and so resume full participation in public procurement. Without this institute, a ground for exclusion would often turn into a de facto permanent ban from the procurement market – even where the undertaking has put in place far-reaching structural reforms that make repetition of the misconduct unlikely.

Procurement law distinguishes between mandatory grounds for exclusion (e.g. a final conviction for corruption, fraud, money laundering, financing of terrorism) and discretionary grounds (e.g. serious professional misconduct, significant deficient performance, breaches of environmental or social law). Self-cleaning is in principle available for both categories, although for mandatory grounds following a final conviction statutory exclusion periods must be observed.

Significance and function

Self-cleaning serves a dual protective function: on the one hand it secures the public interest in a procurement market free from unreliable operators, and on the other it prevents the disproportionate permanent exclusion of undertakings that have credibly reformed.

The burden of proof lies entirely with the undertaking: it must actively and concretely show that the measures taken are capable of restoring its reliability. The contracting authority assesses the evidence and decides at its dutiful discretion, having regard to proportionality. A positive self-cleaning decision does not delete the ground for exclusion but means that the ground will not be invoked in the specific procedure.

Legal basis

The EU-law basis for self-cleaning is Art. 57(6) of Directive 2014/24/EU, which requires Member States to provide for an effective right to self-cleaning and exhaustively lists three categories of permissible measures.

The three categories of measures under Art. 57(6) of Directive 2014/24/EU:

Damages and remediation: proof that the loss caused by the criminal offence or misconduct has been compensated or that a corresponding offer to pay compensation has been made. Mere declarations of intent without concrete steps are insufficient.
Active cooperation with investigating authorities: proof of active cooperation with the competent prosecution or supervisory authorities to fully clarify the facts. This includes full disclosure of information, provision of documents and constructive cooperation in investigations.
Technical and organisational measures: proof of specific personnel, technical and organisational measures to prevent further misconduct. These include in particular: separation of responsible persons, introduction of compliance management systems, internal control structures, training and awareness programmes, and anti-corruption rules.

The contracting authority assesses the measures in light of the gravity and particular circumstances of the offence or misconduct. Where it considers the measures insufficient, it must provide written reasons to the economic operator.

National implementation

Austria (BVergG 2018)

In Austria, self-cleaning is regulated in § 83 BVergG 2018, which transposes Art. 57(6) of Directive 2014/24/EU into Austrian law and specifies the requirements for self-cleaning measures and the procedure for assessment by the contracting authority. The BVergG 2018 provides that the burden of proving self-cleaning lies with the bidder; the contracting authority is not required to investigate of its own motion. The contracting authority must assess at its dutiful discretion, having regard to proportionality, whether the demonstrated measures are sufficient. The decision on self-cleaning must be communicated in writing to the bidder; in case of rejection, reasons must be given. The Federal Administrative Court (BVwG) has jurisdiction over the review of exclusion decisions, including the assessment of self-cleaning. For mandatory grounds, self-cleaning can only become effective after expiry of statutory exclusion periods.

Germany (GWB)

In Germany, self-cleaning is regulated in § 125 GWB, which adopts verbatim the three categories of measures from Art. 57(6) of Directive 2014/24/EU, supplemented by § 126 GWB on exclusion periods. § 125 GWB makes clear that all three categories of measures must be demonstrated cumulatively, in so far as each is relevant and available. § 126 no. 1 GWB lays down exclusion periods for mandatory grounds under § 123 GWB: where a responsible person has been finally convicted, self-cleaning only takes effect after the exclusion period expires (a maximum of five years from the date of conviction). The competent procurement chambers and Higher Regional Courts review self-cleaning decisions in review proceedings. The Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK) has published guidance on the practical implementation of self-cleaning.

Related terms

FAQ

Can an undertaking invoke self-cleaning before a criminal judgment has been handed down? In principle yes. Self-cleaning does not require a final judgment and can be invoked during ongoing investigations or for discretionary grounds for exclusion. Success depends on whether the three categories of measures can be convincingly demonstrated. In ongoing criminal proceedings, cooperation with investigating authorities is particularly important.

What specific evidence must the undertaking provide? The undertaking must provide concrete evidence for each relevant category: proof of compensation paid or a corresponding settlement offer; proof of cooperation with the authorities (e.g. minutes, written confirmations from authorities, decisions to discontinue proceedings); and documented organisational and personnel reform measures (e.g. compliance programmes, training records, HR documentation, revised internal policies).

What happens if the contracting authority rejects self-cleaning? The contracting authority must give written reasons for the rejection. The undertaking can challenge the decision in Austria before the BVwG or the competent Land administrative court, and in Germany before the competent procurement chamber. The review will check whether the contracting authority's decision was free of discretionary errors and proportionate.

Last updated: January 2026 All information without guarantee. For legally binding advice, please consult a law firm specialising in procurement law.