The Law Firm’s advocates and attorneys have once again successfully represented the Client’s interests in appeal proceedings before the National Appeal Chamber (NAC).
The case concerned examination of appeals lodged by three contractors who, in a public procurement procedure for the development of design documentation for an expressway, questioned the selection of the most advantageous bid submitted by the Law Firm’s Client.
The content of each competitor’s appeal focused on attempts to demonstrate that the contracting authority (General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways) had made a mistake during the bid evaluation stage, in that the Client’s bid was considered the most advantageous as a result of an unjustified refusal to award the maximum number of points to the competitors’ bids, while at the same time erroneously awarding such points to the Client’s bid.
When describing the bid evaluation criteria, the contracting authority indicated that, in addition to price, the experience of the personnel assigned by the bidder to perform the contract would influence the selection of the most advantageous bid. The main objection to the Client’s bid concerned the questioning of the experience of the person appointed by the Client to act as a geotechnical expert. The objection in this regard concerned the Contracting Authority’s violation of Article 239(1) in conjunction with Article 16 of the Public Procurement Law.
In the proceedings before the National Appeal Chamber, the Client participated as an intervener on the side of the Contracting Authority, and therefore the role of the Law Firm’s lawyers was to raise arguments supporting the validity of the Contracting Authority’s selection of the Client’s most advantageous bid.
In the course of the proceedings before the National Appeal Chamber, the Law Firm’s advocates and attorneys proved that the content of the appellants’ bids did not allow for the conclusion that the appellants had personnel experienced enough to receive the maximum number of points in the bid evaluation criterion relating to knowledge and experience. At the same time, the Law Firm’s lawyers raised legal arguments (taking into account the provisions of the Geological and Mining Law and its implementing acts) allowing to conclude that the Client’s bid had been properly evaluated by the contracting authority and constituted the most advantageous bid in the proceedings.
During the hearing before the National Appeal Chamber, the Law Firm’s lawyers met the need for practical application of the Public Procurement Law provisions, effectively opposing the National Appeal Chamber’s consideration of additional claims made by the appellant, which in fact were an unjustified attempt to extend the allegations originally made in the appeal.
Effective representation of the Client before the National Appeal Chamber allowed him to conclude a contract for the performance of a public procurement contract worth over PLN 23,000,000.00.