| Abstract [eng] |
The paper analyzes the public contract and its anti-discriminatory regulations that apply to it. A public contract is an exception to the general principle of freedom of contract, as persons providing goods and services under public contracts are required to conclude a contract with all persons applying. A public contract with a legal person (entrepreneur) can be concluded by both natural and legal persons. The conditions for the conclusion of the contract are stipulated in the CC. After analyzing the concept of discrimination, separate elements of this concept were identified. They are as follows: a person in a similar position, in worse conditions (types of discrimination), protected grounds, protected areas and justifications. The prohibitions of discrimination in public contracts were analyzed. The prohibition of discrimination as a constitutional principle of human rights is one of the fundamental principles of international law and the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. It is universally applicable and protects all individuals (both natural and legal). The prohibition of discrimination, as a consumer protection requirement, is a material law requirement and covers the protection of natural persons (consumers) against manufacturers, retailers and service providers. This prohibition prevents consumers of the same category from being imposed different conditions and prices and discrimination regarding advertising or provision of information. The prohibition of discrimination, as a requirement of competition law, applies to a dominant subject in the market. In order to infringe that prohibition on discrimination, it is necessary, inter alia, to have different conditions of competition on different terms. The prohibition of discrimination, as a requirement of public contracts, provides protection for both natural and legal persons. There are two ways in which this prohibition of discrimination can be circumvented: by giving preferential treatment or by discriminating between users of the same category. This prohibition of discrimination has been compared with the aforementioned, thus establishing its necessity. |
