Medical Consumables

Tilleggsinformasjon

Justification for cancellation

While performing the procurement process in connection with the handling of complaints, a breach of the procurement regulations was discovered meaning that Oppdal Municipality has decided to cancel the contest, cf. the Procurement Regulations § 25-4.

There is real legal uncertainty in the case concerning whether the qualitative award criteria quality and environment are designed and applied in accordance with the requirements of the procurement regulations.

The award criteria must be suited to identifying the best offer.

As the award criteria and associated documentation requirements are formulated, questions can be raised about whether the municipality has used award criteria that is unsuitable to identify the best offer.

The qualitative award criteria quality and environment are formulated as a requirement and not as a size that can be graded so that the contracting authority can carry out assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the competing tenders. The municipality has not carried out a qualitative assessment of the tenderer's content in relation to additional fulfilment of the fixed requirements concerning ordering system, goods ordering and use of vehicle with Euroclassification 6.

The award criteria content cannot be changed during the contest and the error can can consequently not be corrected in any other way than cancellation.

The use of illegal award criteria will as a general rule meet the requirement of a causal link for the cancellation obligation. Refer to KOFA case 2011/81 condition 32:

‘(32) An award criteria will normally have great significance for the tenderers, both in the question of participation in the contest and in the design of the offer. The significance may vary with the weight the relevant award criteria is given in the evaluation. As a starting point, it should be assumed that any illegal award criteria may have affected the outcome of the contest, and this will normally trigger an obligation for the contracting authority to cancel the contest. On the basis that the award criteria in the present case should be weighted by 30 %, it is clear that the main rule concerning cancellation also applies in the present case.

Regardless of KOFA case 2012/9 premise 36, it follows that a legal ambiguity with regard to whether there is an illegal award criterion can be factual reason for cancellation.

Visma notice: https://opic.com/id/afurzececd

Tilleggsinformasjon

While performing the procurement process in connection with the handling of complaints, a breach of the procurement regulations was discovered meaning that Oppdal Municipality has decided to cancel the contest, cf. the Procurement Regulations § 25-4.

Tilleggsinformasjon

The qualitative award criteria quality and environment are formulated as a requirement and not as a size that can be graded so that the contracting authority can carry out assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the competing tenders. The municipality has not carried out a qualitative assessment of the tenderer's content in relation to additional fulfilment of the fixed requirements concerning ordering system, goods ordering and use of vehicle with Euroclassification 6.

Tilleggsinformasjon

‘(32) An award criteria will normally have great significance for the tenderers, both in the question of participation in the contest and in the design of the offer. The significance may vary with the weight the relevant award criteria is given in the evaluation. As a starting point, it should be assumed that any illegal award criteria may have affected the outcome of the contest, and this will normally trigger an obligation for the contracting authority to cancel the contest. On the basis that the award criteria in the present case should be weighted by 30 %, it is clear that the main rule concerning cancellation also applies in the present case.