Even if you get excluded, you might still have a chance to win


It might be the case that also the rest of the tenders should be excluded. 

Then, hypothetically, the procurement entity should cancel the procedure and may publicise a new contract notice where you have the possibility to partake. 

According to a judgement from the European Court of Justice, C‑333/18, this hypothetical scenario gives you a legitimate reason to challenge the award to see if your competitors in fact should be excluded.

Read the entire case here



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nuances from the ECJ on the prohibition to negotiat in a case of partial offers

 In the judgment C-737/22 the European Court of Justice made som nuances in the classification of negotiation.   In the case, a central government purchasing unit in Denmark had published a competition on 4 February 2020 for a framework agreement about library material with preparatory services. The award was to be given to the provider with the lowest price. For reasons of competition, the contract was divided into separat lots; east and west. In the tender documents, the procuring entity wrote that the tenderer who offered the lowest price would be awarded the contract for the west.  Furthermore, that the tenderer ranked as No. 2 would be offered the contract for the east, under the condition that the price for the east contract was reduced to the price for the west contract. ECJ states that this possibility was regulated in the tender documents. It was not possible to negotiate the price up or down compared to prices submitted before the offer deadli...
Read more

Leasing vs. works contract

Image
Sometimes it can be hard to know the difference, and the risk is high. If leasing, its exempted from the rules of public procurement. But if the need is fulfilled with a public works contract, it must be treated in adherence to the rules to avoid any sanctions. Luckily the European Court of Justice decided on this matter in the case C-537/19. Highlighting the question whether the specifications set out by the tenant were intended to satisfy stipulations that went beyond what a tenant of a similar building might normally require and lead to the tenant being regarded as having exercised a decisive influence on its design. So, the way forward is to think whether you are behaving like a tenant would normally behave in a similar situation. And if not, whether you have exercised a “decisive influence” on the buildings design. If you have, than you have to follow the procedural rules of public works contracts. Read the entire case here
Read more