Zum Inhalt Zum Hauptmenü

Suchformular

Autor

Austria: Public Procurement

publiziert: 
International Comparative Legal Guide, 2008
Datum: 
1. Januar 2008

1 Relevant Legislation



1.1 What is the relevant legislation and in outline what does each piece of legislation cover?



For the State (Bund) and public bodies on the central government level, the Federal Public Procurement Law 2006 (Bundesvergabegesetz 2006 – "BVergG 2006") implements Directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC (aspects on content) as well as Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC (review proceedings). First, the BVergG 2006 provides for the legal framework for the award of public works, supply and service contracts as well as works and service concessions and contests (the "classic regime"). Second, it contains regulations coordinating the public procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sector (the "sector regime"). Under both regimes, it covers public tenders above and below the thresholds of Regulation (EC) 2083/2005. Third, the BVergG 2006 comprises procedural provisions relating to the review of the award of public contracts.



The BVergG 2006 is also applicable for all aspects on content of public tenders awarded by the nine Austrian Provinces (Bundesländer) and the communities and public bodies governed by them. However, the review proceedings on the regional and local level are exempted from the BvergG 2006 and are subject to nine different provincial laws. These provincial laws do not materially differ from the review proceedings provided for by the BVergG 2006.



1.2 How does the regime relate to supra-national regimes including the GPA and/or EC rules?



The Austrian regime implements the relevant EC Directives. Directive 2007/66/EC amending Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC, with regard to improving the effectiveness of review procedures concerning the award of public contracts has not been transformed into national law yet (transposition until 20 Dec. 2009). Pursuant to §19/2 BVergG 2006, contracting parties from countries with which the Republic of Austria entered into multi- or bi-lateral agreements on public procurement, in particular but not limited to the GPA, must not be discriminated against when awarding public contracts.



1.3 What are the basic underlying principles of the regime (e.g. value for money, equal treatment, transparency) and are these principles relevant to the interpretation of the legislation?



The BVergG 2006 provides for non-discrimination and equal treatment of all candidates and tenderers. These principles imply an obligation of transparency which consists of ensuring, for the benefit of any potential tenderer, a degree of advertising sufficient to enable the market to be open to competition and the impartiality of the procedures to be reviewed. Basically, an advertisement should be published by the contracting entity in order to open the contract award to competition. However, the BVergG 2006 also contains specific derogations allowing, under certain conditions, procedures without prior publication of an advertisement. These principles are indeed relevant to the interpretation of the BVergG 2006. Further, the BVergG 2006 must be interpreted in the spirit of the relevant EC law.



1.4 Are there special rules in relation to military equipment?



No. The BVergG 2006 does not apply to public works, supply and service contracts subject to Art 296 of the Treaty awarded by contracting authorities in the field of defence. There are no other special rules.



2 Application of the Law to Entities and Contracts



2.1 Which public entities are covered by the law and is it possible to obtain a ruling on this issue?



Under the classic regime, bodies governed by public law are covered by the BVergG 2006 provided that:


(a) they were established for the specific purpose of meeting needs in the general interest, not having an industrial and commercial character;


(b) they have at least a limited legal personality (Teilrechtsfähigkeit); and


(c) they:


(i) are financed, for the most of the part, by the State, regional or local authorities or other bodies governed by public law;


(ii) are subject to management supervision by those bodies; or


(iii) have an administrative, management or supervisory board, more than half of whose members are appointed by the State, regional or local authorities or by other bodies governed by public law.



Under the sector regime, bodies governed by public law (as defined above) and additionally public entities are covered by the BVergG 2006. Such entities are undertakings over which the contracting authorities may exercise directly or indirectly a dominant influence by virtue of ownership of them, their financial participation therein or the rules which govern them. A dominant influence is presumed when these authorities, directly or indirectly, in relation to an undertaking:


(a) hold the majority of the undertaking´s subscribed capital;


(b) control the majority of the votes attached to shares issued by the undertaking; or


(c) can appoint more than half of the undertaking´s administrative, management or supervisory body.



It is possible to obtain a ruling on the qualification as a public body or entity: in the case that such body or entity directly awards a contract without applying the required tender procedure, economic operators, who were not invited to submit an offer, can challenge the award and the competent public procurement authorities can declare the direct award null and void.



2.2 Which private entities are covered by the law and is it possible to obtain a ruling on this issue?



Pursuant to the sector regime, private entities must apply the BVergG 2006:


(a) in case they operate in the following sectors:


(i) gas, heat and electricity;


(ii) water;


(iii) certain transport services (services to the public in the field of transport by railway, automated systems, tramway, trolley bus, bus or cable);


(iv) postal services;


(v) exploration for, or extraction of oil, gas, coal or other solid fuel;


(vi) the provision of ports and airports; or


(vii) any combination thereof; and


(b) operate on the basis of special or exclusive rights granted by a competent authority of the Republic of Austria.



With respect to the ruling, see question 2.1 above.



2.3 Which types of contracts are covered?



Public works, supply and services contracts; public works concessions; public service concessions (only fundamental principles of BVergG 2006 are applicable).



2.4 Are there threshold values for determining individual contract coverage?



Basically, all of the above mentioned types of contracts (see question 2.3) are covered by the BVergG 2006 notwithstanding whether the estimated value of the public contract is above or below the thresholds in Regulation 2083/2005. However, the thresholds in the BVergG 2006 are relevant for the choice of the tender procedures. With respect to public tenders above the thresholds of Regulation 2083/2005, more formalised and transparent procedures apply.



2.5 Are there aggregation and/or anti-avoidance rules?



Yes, the general provision that a public tender must not be split (i) to avoid the application of the BVergG 2006 or (ii) to apply a certain tender procedure. Further, the BVergG 2006 comprises specific rules to calculate the value of the public contract (e.g.: in case of lots; with regard to public supply contracts relating to the leasing, hire, rental or hire purchase of products; for public supply and service contracts which are regular in nature or which are intended to be renewed within a given period; insurance contracts; banking and financial services contracts; and design contracts).



2.6 Are there special rules for concession contracts?



Yes. In principle, all types of concession contracts above the threshold of €40,000, in the classic regime and above €60,000 in the sector regime are subject to the BVergG 2006. However, depending on the type of concession and the qualification as a contract under the classic and the sector regimes, different rules of the BVergG 2006 apply. Compared to the other public contracts, concession contracts are not so strictly bound to the rules of the BVergG 2006; in particular, they have more flexibility with respect to the choice of procedure provided that such procedure safeguards the application of the rules and principles of the Treaty and contains an appropriate level of transparency.



3 Procedures



3.1 What procedures can be followed, how do they operate and is there a free choice amongst them?



 "Open procedures" are those procedures in which any economic operator may submit a tender.



 "Restricted procedures with publication of a contract notice (classic regime)/with calling for a competition (sector regime)" are those procedures in which any economic operator may request to participate and whereby only those economic operators invited by the contracting authority may submit a tender.



 "Restricted procedures without publication of a contract notice/without calling for a competition" are those procedures in which selected suitable economic operators are invited to submit a tender.



 "Negotiated procedures with publication of a contract notice/with calling for a competition" are those procedures in which any economic operator may request to participate and whereby only those economic operators invited by the contracting authority may submit a tender and whereby the contracting authority negotiates the terms of contract with those tenderers.



 "Negotiated procedures without publication of a contract notice/without calling for a competition" are those procedures whereby the contracting authority invites certain candidates to submit an offer and then negotiates the terms of contract with the selected tenderers.



 Public contracts can be awarded in the form of a "framework agreement" which is an agreement between one or more contracting authorities and one or more economic operators without any purchase commitment, the purpose of which is to establish the terms governing contracts to be awarded during a given period, in particular with regard to price and, if appropriate, the quantity envisaged; framework contracts can be awarded after carrying out an open procedure, a restricted procedure with publication or a negotiated procedure. Contracts based on a framework agreement may either be awarded directly to a party of the agreement based on terms laid down therein or after an invitation to submit bids. The term of a framework agreement is limited to three years.



 "Dynamic purchasing systems" are completely electronic processes for making commonly used purchases, the characteristics of which, as generally available to the market, meet the requirements of the contracting authority. The system is open to any economic operator who satisfies the selection criteria and has submitted an indicative tender that complies with the specifications. The dynamic purchasing system is established after open procedures (without award) for a limited duration of four years. To award a contract, the contracting authority must invite all tenderers admitted to the system. They will award the contract to the tenderer who submits the best tender on basis of the award criteria set forth in the tender documents to establish the system.



 A "competitive dialogue" is a procedure in which any economic operator may request to participate and whereby the contracting authority conducts a dialogue with the candidates admitted to that procedure, with the aim of developing one or more suitable alternatives capable of meeting its requirements and on the basis of which the candidates chosen are invited to submit a bid.



 An "electronic auction" under the BVergG 2006 is a repetitive process involving an electronic device for the presentation of new prices, revised downwards or new values concerning certain tenders, enabling them to be ranked using automatic evaluation methods; such auction is not an independent procedure, rather it can be applied after open procedures, restricted procedures with publication, certain types of negotiated procedures, when awarding framework agreements, and in the form of a dynamic purchasing system.



 "Design contests" are those procedures which enable contracting authorities to acquire, mainly in the fields of town and country planning, architecture and engineering, advertisement or date processing, a plan or design selected by a jury after being put out to competition with or without the award of prizes. Such contests can be either open, restricted or invited contests.



 "Realisation contests" are contests which lead to a negotiated procedure to award a public service contract after carrying out a design contest.



In the classic regime, contracting authorities are free to choose open or restricted procedures with the publication of a contract notice. Restricted procedures without publication and negotiated proceedings are admissible under certain circumstances. For details, please see orginal article.



In the sector regime, contracting authorities have the choice between open procedures, restricted procedures with a calling for competition and negotiated proceedings with a calling for competition. Below the thresholds of Regulation 2083/2005, all above procedures can be chosen under the sector regime. Direct awards are admissible up to €60,000.



3.2 What are the rules on specifications?



Technical specifications shall afford equal access for tenderers and shall not have the effect of creating unjustified obstacles to the opening of public procurement to competition. Notwithstanding mandatory national technical rules, to the extent that they are compatible with Community law, these specifications must be formulated:


(i) taking into account the following priority:


(a) national standards implementing European standards;


(b) European technical approvals;


(c) international standards and other technical reference systems established by European standardisation bodies; or


(d) in case such standards do not exist, national standards, national approvals or national technical standardisations relating to the design, calculation and execution of works and the use of products, each reference accompanied by the words "or equivalent"; or


(ii) in terms of performance or functional requirements;


(iii) in terms of performance or functional requirements as mentioned in (ii) with reference to the specifications set forth in (i) as a means of presuming conformity with such performance or functional requirements; or


(iv) by referring to technical specifications mentioned in (i) for certain characteristics and by referring to performance and functional requirements for other characteristics.



When a contracting authority refers to the specifications mentioned in (i), it cannot reject a bid, alternative bid or a bid marginally amending the tender (Abänderungsangebote) on the grounds that the products and services tendered do not comply with the specifications to which it has referred once the tenderer proves in his tender, to the satisfaction of the contracting authority and by whatever appropriate means, that the solutions which he proposes satisfy, in an equivalent manner, the requirements defined by the technical specifications. Appropriate means are, in particular, technical dossiers of the manufacturer or a test report from a recognised body.



When a contracting authority uses the option laid down in (ii) to prescribe in terms of performance and functional requirements, it may not reject a bid, alternative bid or a bid marginally amending the tender for works, products and services which comply with a national standard transposing a European standard, with a European technical approval, a common technical specification, an international standard or a technical reference system established by a European standardisation body if these specifications address the performance or functional requirements which it has laid down. In his bid, alternative bid or bid marginally amending the tender, the tenderer must prove the satisfaction of the contracting authority, and by any appropriate means, that the works, services and products in compliance with the standard meets the performance or functional requirements of the contracting authority.



Unless justified by the subject matter of the contract, technical specifications shall not refer to a specific make or source, or a particular process, or to trade marks, patents, types or a specific origin or production with the effect of favouring certain and eliminating certain products. Such reference shall only be permitted on an exceptional basis and be accompanied by the words "or equivalent".



3.3 What are the rules on excluding tenderers?



Tenderers must be excluded, in particular, in the following cases:


(i) pursuant to the personal situation of the candidate and the tenderer (conviction for participation in a criminal organisation, corruption, fraud, money laundering, etc.; in case of insolvency; if the tenderer has been convicted guilty of grave professional misconduct; or has not fulfilled obligations with respect to the payment of social security contributions and taxes, etc.);


(ii) because the tenderer was involved in drafting the tender documents;


(iii) tenderers in absence of suitability due to the lack of sufficient economic and financial standing, professional and technical knowledge;


(iv) bids with speculative prices (abnormally low tenders) and bids with no prices (in which the tenderer only declares to be less expensive than the lowest bid);


(v) in absence of a required bid bond;


(vi) bids that are submitted late;


(vii) bids that are not in accordance with the tender documents; bids for only parts of the contract, alternative bids and bids marginally amending the tender in case they were not allowed by the contacting authority or do not comply with the minimum requirements set forth in the tender documents;


(viii) bids with mistakes and incomplete bids in case the tenderer refuses to amend the bid according to the instructions of the contracting authority;


(ix) tenderers who participated in a bidding cartel;


(x) bids with certain calculation errors;


(xi) bids of tenderers that were not invited to participate in the tender proceedings (only in case of proceedings with restrictions regarding the number of participants); or


(xi) tenderers from other Member States who have not applied for the recognition of their professional suitability until the award of the contract.



The decision to exclude tenderers lies with the contracting authority; a tenderer who is excluded can appeal against such decision and initiate review proceedings.



3.4 What are the rules on short-listing tenderers?



Negotiated procedures can take place in successive stages in order to reduce the number of the tenderers by applying the awarding criteria. The contracting authority must inform tenderers without delay about the decision that their bids will no longer be considered for the award. In the final phase of the negotiated procedure with more than one tenderer, there shall remain a sufficient number of tenderers to uphold true competition.



3.5 What are the rules on awarding the contract and how in practice are they applied?



The base of the award shall either be the most economically advantageous or the bid with the lowest price. An award given to the bid with the lowest price is, in general, only admissible provided that the quality standards were exactly defined in the tender documents and therefore, the quality of the bids will not differ. The criteria for the award given to the most economically advantageous bid must be weighted in the tender documents. These weightings can be expressed by providing a range with an appropriate maximum spread. Where, in the opinion of the contracting authority, weighting is not possible for demonstrable reasons, the contracting authority must indicate in the contracting notice or in the tender documents, the criteria in descending order of importance. In case the tender documents do not determine the base of the award, the contract shall be awarded to the bid with the lowest price. When awarding contracts below the thresholds in Regulation (EC) 2083/2005, under the classic regime and in the sectors in general, the contracting authority has free choice between the two bases of the award.



3.6 What methods are available for joint procurements?



For joint procurements framework agreements, dynamic purchasing systems and central purchasing bodies are available. Such a central purchasing body in Austria on the central governmental level is the Austrian Federal Purchasing Agency (Bundesbeschaffung GmbH), which purchases electricity, gas, heating, telecom services, fuel, transport services, IT-services, cars, etc. for the State.



3.7 What are the rules on alternative bids?



The BVergG 2006 differs between alternative bids and bids marginally amending the tender (Abänderungsangebote). The second can be described as bids that are not real alternatives to the tendered contract, but rather only amend the tender documents in an immaterial manner. Therefore, those bids are also admissible in case the base of the award is the lowest price, whereas alternative bids are limited to tenders where the criterion for the award is that of the most economically advantageous tender.



Contracting authorities must indicate in the tender documents whether or not they authorise alternative bids; alternative bids cannot be authorised in absence of such indication. The contracting authority must provide minimum requirements of such bids. In procedures for awarding public supply or service contracts, contracting authorities, who have authorised alternatives, may not reject an alternative bid on the sole grounds that it would, if successful, lead to either a service contract rather than a public supply contract or a supply contract rather than a public service contract.



Marginal bids amending the tender are admissible even if the tender documents do not authorise them.



4 Exclusions and Exemptions (including in-house arrangements)



4.1 What are the principal exclusions/exemptions and who determines their application?



With respect to exemptions, the BVergG 2006 follows Art. 10 seq. of Directive 2004/18/EC (exemptions for the classic regime) and Art. 19 seq. of Directive 2004/17/EC (exemptions for the sector regime). Hence, the BVergG 2006 does not apply to secret contracts and contracts requiring special security measures, defence procurement, contracts awarded pursuant to international rules, service contracts awarded on the basis of exclusive rights, in-house contracts and further specific exclusions (acquisition or rental of land, existing buildings and land; certain broadcasting contracts; certain financial services, employment contracts, etc.). The application of the exemptions must be determined by the contracting authorities and is subject to review of the public procurement review authorities who can annul contracts directly awarded in breach of the BVergG 2006.



4.2 How does the law apply to "in-house" arrangements, including contracts awarded within a single entity, within groups and between public bodies?



The BVerG 2006 exempts in-house arrangements as defined in the permanent jurisdiction of the ECJ from its scope of application. However, awards of the undertaking to which the in-house contract is awarded, are subject to the BVergG 2006. They must award contracts pursuant to the rules and procedures set forth in the BVergG 2006. There are no specific rules (exemptions) for the award of contacts within groups and between public bodies. Hence, in principle, the BVergG 2006 is applicable for such contracts.



5 Remedies and Enforcement



5.1 Does the legislation provide for remedies/enforcement and if so what is the general outline of this, including as to locus standi?



Yes, most of the decisions of a contracting authority (in particular, but not limited to the tender documents; the exclusion of a candidate or tenderer; the decision to award a contract; the revocation of the tender, etc.) are subject to review and annulment of the public procurement review authorities if such decision is in breach of the BVergG 2006 and the contract has not yet been validly awarded.



Basically, all candidates and tenderers (who submit an application for participation or an offer) have the standing to appeal against a decision of the contracting authority that could potentially adversely affect them, in particular, if they could suffer damages from the contested decision.



Other parties to the review proceedings, apart from the candidate or tenderer initiating the review proceedings, are all candidates and tenderers who can be negatively affected by the judgment filed by the applicant (e.g. if a tenderer files for annulment of the award, then the tenderer with the lowest price or the most economically advantageous bid is also a party to the review proceedings).



The review authorities have the power to annul the decisions of the contracting authority (e.g. the decision to award a contract to a certain tenderer). The contracting authority then must follow the ruling of the authority and make a new decision (e.g. award the contract to someone other than the selected tenderer; amend the tender documents accordingly). To safeguard the effectiveness of the review proceedings, the authority can grant interim relief and suspend the tender procedure or certain decisions (e.g. the decision to award a contract) until its judgment.



After the award of a contract, bidders can request a declaratory judgment of the review authorities that the tender proceedings infringed the BVergG 2006 and/or Community law. Such judgment is a requirement to claim damages from the contracting authority before the civil courts.



5.2 Can remedies/enforcement be sought in other types of proceedings or applications outside the legislation?



Yes, infringement of the BVergG 2006 and other national public procurement laws entitle disregarded (übergangene) candidates to claim forbearance, abatement and damages under the Austrian Act of Unfair Competition. Further, such economic operators can claim damages under civil law.



5.3 Before which body or bodies can remedies/enforcement be sought?



The Bundesvergabeamt (Federal Public Procurement Authority) for all public contracts awarded by the State and public bodies or undertakings on central governmental level.


The nine different public procurement tribunals of the Austrian Provinces, which review decisions of the contracting authorities for all other public contracts, are:


 Vergabekontrollsenat Wien.


 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Niederösterreich.


 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Burgenland.


 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Oberösterreich.


 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Kärnten.


 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Steiermark.


 Vergabekontrollsenat Salzburg.


 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Tirol.


 Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat Vorarlberg.



5.4 What are the legal and practical timing issues raised if a party wishes to make an application for remedies/enforcement?



Time limits for review proceedings are: in general, 14 days from the decision of the contracting authority; seven days in fast track tender procedures; tender documents; and in general, seven days before the time limit for submitting offers or applications for participation expire.



Decisions that are not contested within the above time limits become final (e.g. a candidate does not appeal against tender documents that infringe the principle of equal treatment; the contracting authority decides to award the contract to another tenderer; in its complaint against the decision to award the contract, the tenderer cannot apply for annulment of that decision based on the argument that the tender documents were in breach of the BVergG 2006; this argument is not valid because the tender documents became final if not contested within the time limit provided in the law).



5.5 What remedies are available after contract signature?



See question 5.1: declaratory judgment.



5.6 What is the likely timescale if an application for remedies/enforcement is made?



Interim relief must be granted within one week; regarding an application of a candidate or tenderer, the public procurement authorities must decide to annul a decision of the contracting authority within six weeks up to two months. There are no time limits for the public procurement authorities to render a declaratory judgment.



5.7 Is there a culture of enforcement either by public or private bodies?



Yes. Appeals against decisions of contracting authorities are filed quite frequently and the public procurement authorities annul such decisions on a regular basis. In most cases, such judgments are indeed effective.



5.8 What are the leading examples of cases in which remedies/enforcement measures have been obtained?



The most prominent recent cases are:



 Project "Vienna Central Station-City":


In this case (of March 2008), the Bundesvergabeamt qualified the ÖBB-Immobilienmanagement Gesellschaft m.b.H., the real estate management company of the Austrian Federal Railway Company (Österreichische Bundesbahnen), as a body governed by public law since (i) it was established for the specific purpose of meeting needs in the general interest, not having an industrial or commercial character, (ii) had legal personality and (iii) was controlled by the State (see above question 2.1). The decision was an important ruling because the qualification of such real estate management companies as public bodies was disputed, in particular whether or not they have commercial character and act on the market. Now, it is clear that they are governed by and must award their contracts pursuant to the procedures set forth in the BVergG 2006.



 Gas-Steam Power Plant "Mellach":


VERBUND-Austrian Thermal Power GmbH & Co KG ("VERBUND") initiated a tender procedure for a general contractor for planning and constructing of a gas-steam power plant. The contract was subject to the sector regime of the BVergG 2006. The estimated value of the contract was €500 million. VERBUND decided to award the contract in negotiated procedures with a call for competition. To speed up the schedule, VERBUND changed the ongoing procedure and introduced a preferred bidder selection, which was not announced in the contract notice. In September 2007, a bidder appealed against the preferred bidder decision alleging secret agreements for fraudulent causes between the contracting authority and the selected preferred bidder. The Bundesvergabeamt initiated investigations under administrative assistance of the Federal Criminal Investigation Department (Bundeskriminalamt). Further, four other bidders appealed against the preferred bidder decision on the same grounds. In the end, four applications were dismissed and one withdrawn. Currently, four complaints are pending with the Austrian Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgerichtshof) and three with the Austrian Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof). This was the first case in Austria where the Bundesvergabeamt had to cooperate with criminal investigation authorities.



 Brenner-Base Tunnel:


This decision is of interest because it deals with the scope of application of the BVergG 2006. The Brenner-Base Tunnel Societas Europea ("BBT SE") awarded a public works contract in an open procedure. The shareholders of BBT SE, with its corporate seat in Innsbruck, Austria, are the Republic of Italy (50%), the Republic of Austria (25%) and the Province of Tyrol (25%). In addition to the bi-national character of the company, the tendered test drillings should take place on Italian territory. Nonetheless, the Bundesvergabeamt accepted the application and initiated review proceedings to safeguard efficiency of remedies in tender procedures.



6 Changes During a Procedure and After a Procedure



6.1 Does the legislation govern changes to contract specifications, changes to the timetable, changes to contract conditions (including extensions) or changes to contract terms post-signature? If not, what are the underlying principles governing these issues?



No explicit regime. Basically, post-signature changes to public contracts are governed by the provisions of the awarded contract and additionally by the general principles of civil law, in particular the Austrian General Civil Code (Allgemeines Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch). However, all material amendments, to be defined as novations (Novation) and changes other than those relating to collateral clauses trigger the requirement of a new tender of the contract.



6.2 In practice, how do purchasers and providers deal with these issues?



To avoid a new tender, quite frequently public contracts provide for adjustment clauses or options to extend the term of the contract or the scope of the supply and services. If such clauses have been part of the original tender, they are in line with the BVergG 2006.



7 Privatisations and PPPs



7.1 Are there special rules in relation to privatisations and what are the principal issues that arise in relation to them?



There are no special rules.



7.2 Are there special rules in relation to PPPs and what are the principal issues that arise in relation to them?



There are no special rules.



8 Other Relevant Rules of Law



8.1 Are there any related bodies of law of relevance to procurement by public and other bodies?



The Bundesbeschaffung GmbH as a central purchasing body of the State.



9 The Future



9.1 Are there any proposals to change the law and if so what is the timescale for these and what is their likely impact?


It is expected that the new Directive 2007/66/EC will be implemented in the BVergG 2006 during 2008.




To view the original publication please click

here.

Disclaimer

Alle Angaben auf dieser Website dienen nur der Erstinformation und können keine rechtliche oder sonstige Beratung sein oder ersetzen. Daher übernehmen wir keine Haftung für allfälligen Schadenersatz.

The material contained in this website is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal or other professional advice. We accept no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on information contained on this site.



© 2020 · DORDA · Facebookinstagramlinkedin  PODCAST

wirschaffenklarheit