public procurement | In Principle

The Public Procurement Law of 11 September 2019 improperly implements the exclusion ground for improper performance of a former contract, as it ignores the specifics of the Polish public procurement market. This error can be corrected by a legislative change or by a pro-EU interpretation of the existing law.

A contractor is obliged to calculate the bid price fairly and factor in everything that follows from the terms of reference, including typical risks associated with contract performance, so that the bid is realistic and allows for proper performance of the contract. If the bid price appears abnormally low or is otherwise questionable, the contractor must explain it in detail.

Special acts introduced in isolation from existing solutions distort good law. This can be seen in how the public procurement market in Poland has been affected by successive amendments to the Covid Special Act. Today a special act is unnecessary, and force majeure provisions will suffice. Instead, it would be useful to amend the provision governing claims for a change in the amount or method of payment for public contracts.

The purpose for stating the projected execution costs in the rules for a contest is for contestants to be aware of the contracting authority’s financial capabilities. Contestants should take this value into account when preparing their entries, or their entry will not be considered by the contest jury, the National Appeal Chamber held in its ruling of 10 January 2022 (KIO 3624/21).

This time Mirella Lechna-Marchewka heading the firm’s Infrastructure and Public Procurement practices, discusses war as force majeure in the context of Russian aggression on Ukraine.

For the past two years, public procurement contractors have been forced to invoke force majeure to protect themselves from liability for delays in performance of contracts. We thought everything had been written about force majeure, but the war in Ukraine requires the invocation of force majeure in a different context.

Beginning this year, contracts for local government units in performance of their public duties must be executed using vehicles powered by electricity or natural gas. And when awarding contracts for purchase of new means of transport, all contracting authorities must allocate at least a portion of the funds to green vehicles. The Electromobility Act specifies the subject matter of such procurements, limits and types of vehicles.

The EU thresholds and the euro exchange rate for converting threshold amounts from euros to Polish zlotys will be higher from 1 January 2022. The PLN/EUR conversion rate is also going up.

Requiring personal performance of key tasks is one of the guarantees of proper contract performance. However, contracting authorities must remember that this institution cannot be abused and treated mechanically, without taking into account the specifics of the given procurement. Therefore, contractors may challenge the terms of reference if they believe that the requirements are too stringent and limit their ability to participate in performance of the contract. Such challenges can be effective, as demonstrated by the ruling by the National Appeal Chamber of 13 October 2021 (KIO 2733/21).

Public procurement is the process by which public authorities – government departments or local authorities – purchase work, goods or services from companies in the market. Recent changes to the public procurement law brought many improvements.

When filling in the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD) form, contractors must answer the question whether they have committed grave professional misconduct while performing previous contracts. This question is closely correlated with the condition for exclusion under Art. 109(1)(5) of the Public Procurement Law, which specifies that this concerns violations that are serious and self-caused. Therefore, a contractor does not necessarily have to mention any and all delays or complications that occurred during the performance of previous contracts. In this context, an interesting ruling was issued by the National Appeal Chamber on 4 June 2021 (KIO 1087/21) indicating how this question from the ESPD form should be interpreted.

Some characteristics of the performance offered by a contractor can only be verified at the contract performance stage. But if such non-price criteria are supposed to be considered when evaluating bids, verification only at the stage of contract performance renders these criteria illusory, as the contractors compete on the basis of price anyway. So far, decisions from the National Appeal Chamber have allowed the use of such criteria. But on 18 December 2020, the Warsaw Regional Court issued a judgment holding that the characteristics of the performance offered by a contractor should be verified before selecting the most advantageous bid. Will this judgment change the approach taken by the National Appeal Chamber?