| Abstract [eng] |
The subject covered by this work is the limits of the contracting authority's discretion in drawing up procurement conditions that would also ensure non-discriminatory suppliers. For the sake of clarity and accuracy, the work primarily analyses the principles of public procurement, their relationship with ensuring competition and the concept of competition and non-discrimination obligations. A significant aspect that is noted in the work is that it is not precisely regulated whether competition in public procurement is considered a principle, an end or protected by values in itself. The second part of the work deals with the issues of the limits of the discretion of contracting authorities. The first problem arises when the contracting authority imposes excessive requirements or disproportionate requirements in the terms of the procurement, thereby privileging the product of the sole producer for the purpose of acquiring it. A situation in which the contracting authority is given the discretion to identify and define the object of the procurement, which may relate to the requirements that are in place to ensure the successful performance of the contract. However, functional requirements must be laid down and not by indicating the chosen manufacturer or model meeting such requirements, thereby recovering. The third problem is that contracting authorities are not properly interpreted and applied the doctrine of equivalence. The contracting authority shall not be entitled to reject a tender on the ground that the goods, services or works offered do not constitute a technical specification requirement if the supplier proves to the contracting authority that the solutions proposed by him are equivalent and meet the requirements of the technical specification. The last part of the work deals with improperly drawn up procurement conditions and the sanctions imposed on contracting authorities for this. It should be noted that the application of alternative sanctions to contracting authorities does not restore the rights violated by a fair supplier, and the institute of compensation for damages is quite problematic and burdensome. |
