All Investment Schemes including their Managers should not be in any of the following cases, which are grounds for exclusion:

  1. Any offerors who have been convicted by means of an irrevocable court judgement for any of the following crimes:
    1. participation in a criminal organisation¸ as defined in article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 (OJ L 300 of 11.11.2008, p. 42) on the fight against organised crime;
    2. bribery, as defined in Article 3 of the Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of Member States of the European Union (OJ C 195 of 25 June 1997, p. 1) and Article 2(1) of Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA of the Council of 22 July 2003, on combating corruption in the private sector (OJ L 192 of 31.7.2003, p. 54) and in the applicable laws or in the economic operator’s national legislation;
    3. fraud, as defined in Article 1 of the Convention on the protection of the financial interests of the European Communities (OJ C 316 of 27.11.1995, p. 48), as ratified by Law 2803/2000 (GG Series A, No. 48);
    4. terrorist crimes or crimes associated with terrorist activity, as defined respectively in Articles 1 and 3 of Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA of the Council of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (OJ L 164 of 22.6.2002, p. 3) or for inciting, aiding or abetting, and attempting a crime, as defined in Article 4 thereof;
    5. money laundering or terrorist financing, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ L 309 of 25.11.2005, p. 15), as transposed by Law 3691/2008 (GG Α 166);
    6. child labour or other forms of human trafficking, as defined in Article 2 of Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (OJ L 101 of 15.4.2011, p. 1), as transposed by Law 4198/2013 (GG Α, 215);
    7. crimes punishable under the laws governing the market of securities / transferable securities / payments instruments, including laws on market manipulation, acts of persons holding confidential information, usury, jobbery, misappropriation or financial crime in general.
  2. Ineligible to participate in this procedure are also any offerors in respect of whom:
    1. HDBI knows they have defaulted on their tax or social security obligations and this is established by means of an irrevocable and enforceable court judgement or administrative order, in accordance with the laws of the country in which such parties are established or under national law;
    2. HDBI possesses sufficient evidence to prove that they have defaulted on their tax or social security obligations;
    3. HDBI knows or possesses sufficient evidence to prove that, within two (2) years before the date an Expression of Interest was submitted: aa) three (3) fine imposition acts have been issued against them by the competent auditing bodies of the Labour Inspectorate, for labour law violations that are characterised as “serious” or “extremely serious” under Ministerial Decision no. 2063 /D1632/2011 (GG B, 266), as in force from time to time, which were cumulatively established in the context of three (3) audits; or bb) two (2) fine imposition acts have been issued against them by the competent auditing bodies of the Labour Inspectorate, for labour law violations relating to non-declared employment, which were cumulatively established in the context of two (2) audits. The sanctions set out in sections (aa) and (bb) above must have become irrevocable and enforceable. If an offeror is a Greek citizen or an entity established in Greece, its social security obligations include both primary and secondary insurance. The provisions of sections (a), (b) and (c) above shall no longer apply if the offeror/economic operator concerned has fulfilled its obligations either by paying the relevant amount of taxes or social security contributions, including, as applicable, any amount of accrued interest or fines, or by entering into a binding payment arrangement.
  3. Offerors shall also be excluded as per paragraphs (1) and (2) if the person against whom an irrevocable court judgement has been issued is a member of their administrative, management or supervisory body or empowered to represent, make decisions or control it. The restriction prescribed in the preceding section applies to:
    1. The administrators of Limited Liability Companies (“EPE”), Private Limited Companies (“IKE”) and General or Limited Partnerships (“OE” or “EE”);
    2. The CEO and all members of the Board of Directors of Sociétés Anonymes;
    3. The members of the Board of Directors of cooperatives.
  4. By way of exception, the grounds of exclusion prescribed in paragraphs (1) through (3) above shall not apply in any situations where exclusion is clearly disproportionate, especially if the defaulted tax or social security obligations are only minor or if the debtor became informed of the outstanding tax/social security payment at a time when he was unable to take any action prior to expiry of the deadline for submission of proposals.
  5. An offeror who falls within the scope of paragraphs (1) and (2c) above may present evidence suggesting that they have taken proper action to prove their credibility, although the relevant ground of exclusion still stands. If the evidence adduced as above is considered to be adequate, the offeror shall not be excluded from the evaluation procedure. For that purpose, offerors are liable to prove that they have restored or committed to restore any damage arising from their crime or misconduct; that they have thoroughly clarified the facts and circumstances of the act, by actively cooperating with the investigation authorities, and that they have taken specific technical and organisational measures and staff-related measures to prevent any further criminal acts or misconduct. Any remedial actions taken by offeror shall be evaluated in conjunction with the severity and the particular circumstances of the criminal act or misconduct concerned. If such measures are found to be inadequate, the reasoning of the decision is notified to the offeror.