In public procurement procedures, contractors are often called on to justify the price they offer. If the explanation is too general or imprecise, the offer can be rejected.
The “Creditors’ Package,” an overhaul of numerous acts, entered into force on 1 June 2017. Among other changes, it authorises public finance units to conclude settlements when certain conditions are fulfilled. This creates the hope for a more flexible attitude of public entities, open to dialogue with the private sector. But will this actually be achieved?
The regulation on retention of a contractor’s bid bond has not uniformly interpreted. Two different views have developed in the case law and the legal literature on the situations when the contracting authority can apply this sanction.
The joint and several liability of the investor on a construction project for the fees of the subcontractors under Polish law is particularly strict. Thus owners of construction projects should note the statutory solutions (recourse claims by investors and limitations in subject matter and amount introduced in the amended Civil Code) and the permissible use of contractual clauses to soften this liability regime.
The automatic assumption of contracts that occurs in universal succession doesn’t work in the case of public procurement. The contracting authority must decide on the fate of the contract after verifying the new contractor.
Contractors initially declare that they meet the conditions for participating in a procurement, and at a later stage submit confirming documents. This rule applies to all modes for awarding public contracts, but the law provides for certain exceptions.