Created: 18 May 2022

The latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily concerning case law features an article entitled "Adjustments to a Contractor's Remuneration". This was authored by the SPZP member, Katarzyna Skiba-Kuraszkiewicz.

The text of the publication is available here.

Created: 05 May 2022

In the latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily concerning case law, an article was published entitled "Estimating the value of orders - errors and doubts". The article was written by Andrzej Czerniak, a member of the SPZP.

The text of the publication is available here.

Created: 21 April 2022

On 20 April 2022, the Public Procurement Law Association (SPZP) submitted a position paper as part of the consultation on the project "A Green Paper on the Certification of Public Procurement Contractors" to the Ministry of Development and Technology.

The Green Paper aims to present the basic assumptions concerning the principles of the functioning of the certification of contractors in the public procurement system, to define its beneficiaries, and other entities involved in the certification process.

The position paper was prepared by a team of three SPZP members: Wojciech Merkwa (coordinating the work of the team), Katarzyna Skiba-Kuraszkiewicz, and Tomasz Zalewski.

The full text of the SPZP's position can be found at this link.

Created: 20 April 2022

In today's supplement to Rzeczpospolita, the article "Knowledge and experience can be made available" was published. The article was written by Marcin Boczek, a member of the SPZP.

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 06 April 2022

In today's supplement to Rzeczpospolita, the article "When it is possible to stipulate that certain tasks are to be performed by one company and not another" was published. The article was written by Agnieszka Gilowska, a member of the SPZP.

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 24 March 2022

We invite you to read the article written by Katarzyna Kuźma and Wojciech Merkwa entitled "Circumstances of exclusion in public procurement law". The article is a summary of the debate that took place on 18 January 2011.

The article is a summary of the debate held on 18 January which was organised by Konfederacja Lewiatan and the Public Procurement Law Association. The discussion focused on the effects of the new wording of a provision of Public Procurement Law on the public procurement system, providing for the possibility to exclude a contractor from a procedure due to problems with the performance of other contracts.

Click here to see the article.

Created: 23 March 2022

In today's supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily regarding jurisprudence, the article "Public-private partnerships should have clear rules" was published. It was authored by Irena Skubiszak-Kalinowska, a member of the SPZP.

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 01 March 2022

(last update - 22 march 2022)

Dear All,

A very large number of people from Ukraine are now coming to Poland to find shelter from the war. It is obvious that, apart from individual aid measures, the size of the tragedy and its effects require the involvement of state institutions. In particular, the process of organising direct support may sometimes require applying the provisions of the Act of 11 September 2019 – Public Procurement Law (“PPL”).

With this in mind, in a sense of responsibility and solidarity, we present key practical information which may be useful to entities having the status of a contracting authority under the PPL. To ensure the document's communicativeness, we present the prepared explanations in the form of 10 practical questions and concise answers.

If you identify any further difficulties or need further clarifications, please contact us at the following Association e-mail address: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. On a free-of-charge basis, we will try to answer any questions concerning the PPL aspects related to the procedure of awarding public contracts by Polish contracting authorities as part of direct support to persons affected by the acts of war in Ukraine.

The PPL issues of key practical importance for the efficient provision, in the public procurement system, of aid due to a humanitarian crisis include:

• the general scope of the obligation to apply the provisions of the PPL (Q 1-6),
• specific exclusions (Q7),
• the conclusion of contracts according to the single-source procurement procedure (Q8),
• andinstruments for “accelerating” purchasing processes (Q9-10).

1. Are there specific regulations for awarding contracts in the case of a humanitarian crisis?

No, as at the date of the publication of the statement, no regulations have been enacted that would regulate the award of public contracts to counter the negative effects of the humanitarian crisis caused by the war in Ukraine.

However, we would like to remind you that, in 2015, the European Commission published Communication COM (2015) 454 “on Public Procurement rules in connection with the current asylum crisis”. This document is a useful source of practical information on which the information contained in this statement is also based.

Link to the European Commission Communication.

2. When is it necessary to apply the PPL’s provisions?

The application of the PPL’s provisions is obligatory only if the following conditions are (jointly) met:

• a contract for pecuniary interest is concluded by an entity having the status of a contracting authority,
• the contract value exceeds the “de minimis threshold” (see item 5 below),
• andthe contract is not covered by any subjective or objective exemptions.

3. Who is obliged to apply the PPL’s provisions?

The status of a contracting authority, i.e. the entity obliged to apply the PPL, is held by the entities referred to in Articles 4-6 of the PPL. A detailed analysis of this status may be problematic. In view of the challenges faced, it is important to emphasize that such a status is held, in particular, by:

• government administration authorities,
• local government units and their associations,
• metropolitan unions,budget units,
• local government budgetary establishments,
• executive agencies,
• public sector enterprises,state earmarked funds,
• independent public health care establishments,
• public universities, and
• State Treasury companies and municipal companies operating in so-called infrastructure sectors (Article 5(4) of the PPA).

4. Are foundations obliged to apply the PPL’s provisions?

This doubt is relatively common for foundations which receive public funding for their activities. The mere fact of obtaining a grant or other form of support to implement a specific project does not create an obligation to apply the PPL’s provisions. What is crucial is the nature of the financial aid. According to the valid opinion of the President of the Public Procurement Office, such an obligation arises where the support consists of financing the foundation’s general functioning. However, such an obligation does not arise where the support from public funds covers a specific project’s implementation.

Link to the opinion of the President of the Public Procurement Office.

5. What value of contracts require the PPL’s provisions to be applied?

If contracting authorities are public institutions (in particular, local government units and government administration authorities), the threshold for the mandatory application of the PPL’s provisions is PLN 130,000.

For “sectoral contracting” authorities, this threshold is:

- PLN 1,919,502 for supplies and services contracts,

- PLN 4,453,600 for social services contracts, and

- PLN 23,969,275 for construction works contracts.

The conclusion of contracts with a value lower than the amounts specified above does not require the PPL’s provisions to be applied. All the amounts given above are exclusive of VAT.

6. How to estimate the contract value?

The contract value is determined based on the economic operator's total estimated remuneration excluding value added tax (VAT), determined with due diligence. If the contracting authority has recently awarded contracts similar to those it intends to award in connection with the organisation of aid to Ukrainians and Ukraine, doubts may arise as to whether, to estimate the value of the contract, both “purchases” should not be aggregated.

If the contracting authority demonstrates that it could not foresee the need to award another, similar contract, then the condition of the time concurrency test would not be met. In such a situation, there will also be no obligation to jointly estimate the value of the contracts.

7. Is it necessary to apply the PPL’s provisions whenever the estimated value of the contract exceeds the de minimis threshold?

In these circumstances, there may be more frequent situations where, even despite the value of the contract exceeding the de minimis threshold, it will not be necessary to apply the PPL’s provisions to award the contract. Exceptions with a particular potential for use include:

• Article 11(1)(6) of the PPL, under which, the PPL’s provisions do not apply to contracts for the purchase of property rights or other rights to buildings or real estates. Therefore, if the contracting authority intends to extend the premises base to make it available to persons in need, it does not have to apply the provisions of the PPL; and
• Article 11(1)(9) of the PPA, under which, the provisions of the PPL do not apply to contracts where the subject-matter of the contracts includes civil defence, civil protection, or prevention services provided by non-commercial organisations and covered by the CPV codes 75250000-3, 75251000-0, 75251100-1, 75251110-4, 75251120-7, 75252000-7, 75222000-8, 98113100-9, and 85143000-3, defined in the Common Procurement Vocabulary, except for patient medical transport services.

7a. Have any special solutions been implemented in the area of public procurement law in connection with the war in Ukraine?

Yes, the Act of 12 March 2022 implemented solutions on assisting Ukrainian nationals regarding the armed conflict in the territory of Ukraine (“Special Act”) which, as regards the award of contracts, entered into force on the date of its publication, i.e. with effect from 24 February 2022.
The Special Act’s provisions provide for exemptions from the obligation to apply the PPL’s provisions when concluding agreements necessary to perform the following tasks:

• tasks carried out by municipal authorities consisting of enabling a Ukrainian citizen to take a photograph required to apply for the PESEL (Personal ID) number free of charge (Section 8 paragraph 1 of the Special Act);
• the purchase of computer hardware and services for municipalities necessary for the performance of their tasks by the minister competent for computerisation (Section 8 paragraph 1 of the Special Act);
• ensuring the right to social benefits (Section 26 paragraph 5 of the Special Act);
• the provision of medical care and assistance for accommodation and meals or assistance in the form of a cash benefit by the Head of the Office for Foreigners (Section 112 paragraph 5) of the Act of 13 June 2003 on granting protection to foreigners in the territory of the Republic of Poland); and
• the execution of emergency instructions issued by the Prime Minister based on the provisions of the Act on Crisis Management (Section 7c Paragraph 1 of that act).

However, one may estimate that the exemption laid down in Section 12 paragraph 6 of the Special Act will be of crucial practical importance. Under that provision, the PPL will not apply to public contracts necessary to provide assistance consisting of:

1. accommodation;
2. the provision of all-day collective meals;
3. the transport to and between places of accommodation or between those places and facilities operated by the Head of the Office for Foreigners or places where medical care is provided to Ukrainian nationals;
4. the financing of public transport and specialised transport for persons with disabilities, in particular, to or between the places referred to in items 1–3 above;
5. making arrangements for a place of residence, consisting of ensuring lodging conditions that enable or support artistic, scientific, didactic, or research activities in the field of art, professional, or artistic development;
6. establishing an artistic scholarship, consisting of the provision of support in kind or financial support that enables or supports artistic, scientific, didactic, or research activities in the field of art, professional, or artistic development; and
7. organising an artistic stay, consisting of the provision of lodging conditions, support in kind or financial support that enables or supports artistic, scientific, didactic, or research activities in the field of art, professional, or artistic development.

However, it is important that the subjective scope of this exemption has been precisely indicated and many ordering parties will not be eligible for its application.
It may be used by:

• the voivode;
• another public administration body;
• units subordinate to or supervised by public administration bodies;
• public finance sector entities; and
• other public administration authorities, local self-government units, associations of local self-government units, or metropolitan associations.

It should also be emphasised that only the agreements necessary to provide the assistance referred to above as well as those necessary to communicate the assistance addressed to Ukrainian citizens are covered by the exemption. When concluding an agreement based on an exemption, it is obligatory to publish, in the Public Procurement Bulletin, information on the factual circumstances justifying its application as well as to provide:

1. the name and address of the registered seat of the ordering party;
2. the date and place of the agreement being concluded or information about the agreement being concluded by electronic means;
3. a description of the subject matter of the agreement specifying, respectively, the quantity of items or other goods and the scope of services;
4. the price (or the maximum price if the price is not known at the time when the announcement is published); and
5. the name (business name) of the entity or full name of the person with whom the agreement was concluded.

8. If there are no grounds to exclude the application of the PPL’s provisions, is it necessary to organise an open, formalised procedure, e.g. an open tender?

In these circumstances, in many cases, it will be possible to use the single-source procurement procedure whereby the contracting authority awards the contract after negotiations with only one economic operator under Article 214(1)(5) of the PPA. Under that provision, the procedure in question may be applied where, due to an exceptional situation not resulting from reasons attributable to the contracting authority which it could not have foreseen, urgent execution of the contract is required and the time limits specified for the other procurement procedures cannot be complied with.

Before applying that prerequisite, it is always necessary to consider in detail whether all the conditions listed under Article 214(1)(5) have been met. The reasonable solution is to provide as detailed factual and legal justification as possible.

However, it may be assumed that, in the current circumstances, the demonstration of those grounds should not cause particular difficulties. In this regard, the guidelines contained in the above-mentioned Communication of the European Commission (COM (2015) 454), the extracts of which are cited below, are helpful and should certainly be worth using in formulating a justification to apply the aforesaid provision:

• “It can be expected that, in general, a concrete contracting authority did not and could not know sufficiently in advance how many asylum seekers it would have to provide for. The specific need for an individual municipality to provide housing, supplies or services to asylum seekers could, therefore, not be planned in advance, and would thus constitute an unforeseeable event for the municipality in question.”
• “It cannot be doubted that the most immediate needs of the asylum seekers coming to the various Member States (housing, supplies and services) should be ensured with all possible speed.”
• “For the provision of the most immediate needs to asylum seekers within a very short timeframe, the causal link between the increase in asylum seekers and the need to provide for their needs cannot reasonably be doubted.”

The formal obligations of the contracting authority that awards a contract is limited to inviting the successful tenderer to negotiations, keeping a record of the procedure, concluding a contract, and publishing a notice. From 1 January 2021, the application of the single-source procurement procedure does not require, in any respect, notifying the President of the Public Procurement Office of such a procedure being initiated.

9. In the case of a decision to organise a competitive procedure (e.g. an open tender), is it possible to speed up the procurement process in relation to the default schedule resulting from the PPL’s provisions?

In some situations, the contracting authority may consider that the optimal solution is not to award a contract on a single-source basis, but to organise a competitive procedure. However, in such circumstances, the contracting authority does not have to worry about the necessity to organise a long-lasting procedure.

In particular, due to the urgent need to award a public contract, there is a possibility to shorten the time limit for the submission of applications for admission to the tender procedure or the time limit for the submission of tenders.

Furthermore, the identification of the urgent need justifies the application of a negotiated procedure without publication (Article 209(1)(4) of the PPA). This is a procedure whereby a contracting authority negotiates the terms of a public procurement contract with economic operators of its choice and then invites them to submit their tenders. Therefore, this is a reasonable solution because although the contracting authority intends to obtain the most advantageous tender during the competitive rivalry between economic entities, it wants to limit their circle to only a few selected economic operators.

In the case of sectoral contracting authorities, the power under Article 393(1)(1) of the PPA may also be a specific instrument to make procedures more flexible and less formalised. That provision allows an abstention from applying obligatory grounds for exclusion and therefore, demanding subjective requests for subjective evidence relating to those grounds.

10. Will the initiation of appeal proceedings by lodging an appeal with the National Board of Appeals always entail an extension of the procedure?

The contracting authority’s activities may be challenged by economic operators as being non-compliant with the PPL’s provisions by lodging an appeal with the National Board of Appeal (“KIO”). If an appeal is lodged, the conclusion of a public procurement contract before the resolution of the appeal proceedings will, in principle, be impossible.

However, where an appeal is lodged at the stage following the selection of the most advantageous tender, the contracting authority may have, at its disposal, an instrument enabling the conclusion of the contract despite the appeal being lodged. Namely, under Article 578(2) of the PPA, it is possible to submit a request to the KIO to repeal the ban on the conclusion of the contract which the KIO will take into account if:

1. the failure to conclude a contract could have adverse effects on public interest which exceed the advantages of the need to protect all interests in respect of which there is a likelihood of injury as a result of the actions taken by the contracting authority in the procurement procedure; andt
2. he contracting authority proved with a reasonable degree of likelihood that the appeal is lodged exclusively to prevent the conclusion of the contract.

It is worth noting that, based on the KIO’s jurisprudence to date, convincing arguments can be formulated that the ongoing humanitarian crisis caused by the war in Ukraine would be the basis for lifting the ban on concluding the contract, which obviously, in specific circumstances, requires detailed justification.

Created: 23 February 2022

In the latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily concerning jurisprudence, an article was published titled, "The submitted parts of financial statements must have a specific form". The article was authored by Sylwester Kuchnio, a member of the SPZP.

The text of the publication is available here.

Created: 15 February 2022

18 January 2022. The Public Procurement Law Association had the pleasure of co-organising a debate with the Lewiatan Confederation entitled, "PROBLEMS WITH PERFORMING A CONTRACT AND GROUNDS FOR EXCLUSION FROM PUBLIC TENDERING".

The following speakers participated in the debate: Hubert Nowak, President of the Public Procurement Office; Mariusz Haładyj, President of the Polish General Prosecutor's Office and member of the Public Procurement Council; Przemysław Grosfeld, Deputy Director at the Ministry of Development and member of the Public Procurement Council; Małgorzata Śledziewska, Deputy Director of the Procurement Department at PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna S.A.; and Artur Luczak, Director of the Rzeszów Branch of Erbud S.A.

The meeting was chaired by the following members of the SPZP: Katarzyna Kuźma and Wojciech Merkwa.

The debate was devoted to one of the most controversial grounds for exclusion provided for in Art. 109 sec. 1 item 7 of the Public Procurement Law, i.e. the consequences of non-performance or improper performance of a prior public procurement or concession agreement. The speakers emphasised that this is an extremely important topic for all participants in the public procurement market, yet one which raises significant interpretative questions and is treated inconsistently in case law.

Some of the speakers suggested that legislative changes should be introduced to make the rules more precise. Other participants of the debate suggested promoting good practices among market participants or developing interpretative guidelines which would help to standardise the application of Article 109 (1) (7) of the Public Procurement Law in practice.

The debate enjoyed great interest which translated into a lively discussion among the participants.
We would like to thank the speakers for a valuable discussion, as well as all who actively participated in the debate.

Please view the debate recordings:
Part one
Part two
Part three

Created: 15 February 2022

Today's issue of Dziennik Gazeta Prawna features a ranking of lawyers that have the greatest impact on social, economic, and political life in Poland. Aldona Kowalczyk, co-founder and President of the Board of the Public Procurement Law Association (PPLA), was singled out in the ranking.
"In our ranking, we traditionally focus on which lawyers have had an impact on our reality and how they have expressed that impact. We are reserved in our assessments; we leave them to our readers," concluded Krzysztof Jedlak, editor-in-chief of Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.

The ranking indicates that PPLA "focuses on solving the real problems in the public procurement market and does so extremely effectively. Without beating about the bush, and focusing on the substance of the issue, the PPLA points out the dangers of misinterpreting the rules and fights to change approaches."

The PPLA associates more than 50 lawyers actively providing legal assistance in the field of public procurement law, PPP, and concessions. DGP's list emphasises the reputation and recognition of the Association as a professional organisation whose voice resounds in relationships between officials and participants in the public procurement market.

Created: 09 February 2022

"Tenders - you can combine potentials to meet the conditions for participation in the procedure," by Irena Skubiszak-Kalinowska, a member of the SPZP, has been published in the latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily on jurisprudence.

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 19 January 2022

Today's issue of Dziennik Gazeta Prawna features an article on an opinion issued by the Public Procurement Office, at the request of the Public Procurement Law Association, regarding the application of the civil law institution of the transfer of direct payments to subcontractors for public works contracts.

In the article, Aldona Kowalczyk, Public Procurement Law Association Chairman; and Jarosław Jerzykowski, a member of the PPLA Audit Committee; comment on and explain the content of the opinion.

The article is available in print and on the DGP website.

Created: 12 January 2022

In the latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily on jurisprudence, two articles written by SPZP’s (Public Procurement Law Association) members were published:

• "Remuneration for the public procurement contractor and payment to subcontractors" by Jaroslaw Jerzykowski, access the content here.
• "A statement of the ordering party is sufficient to reduce the price" by Michal Drozdowicz, access the content here.

Created: 05 January 2022

On 4 January 2022, the Public Procurement Office responded to the SPZP's request for an opinion on how to apply the civil law institution of remitting direct payments to subcontractors undertaking public works contracts. In its opinion*, the Public Procurement Office (UZP) confirmed that the application of remitting the debt owed to a contractor based on a subcontractor agreement does not conflict with the provisions of Public Procurement Law.

* the text of the PPO's reply is only available in Polish

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 22 December 2021

Konfederacja Lewiatan and the Public Procurements Law Association invite you to the following debate:

PROBLEMS WITH PERFORMING A CONTRACT AND GROUNDS FOR EXCLUSION FROM PUBLIC TENDERING
to be held on 18 January 2022, 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

The Public Procurements Act (PPA), in force since 1 January 2021, has introduced a number of changes, including in the matter that is so significant for the public procurements market, in the grounds for exclusion from procedures for the award of a public contract. One of the prerequisites that is most controversial in practice, inconsistently construed by case law, has been provided for in Art. 109 Sec. 1 point 7 of the PPA.

This provision was modified in comparison to the previously applicable version (which was also controversial). The new wording was not successful in dispelling previous doubts; instead, it also has generated new, previously unknown, risks.
One of the essential elements which deepens doubts is the method in which contractors should prepare their statements in the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD). This question has a broader scope than the prerequisite for exclusion under Art. 109 Sec. 1 point 7 of the PPA. In this regard, the decision-making practice and case law are inconsistent and the consequence of this legal uncertainty leads to: 1) the risks of breaching the principle of equal treatment of contractors in granting access to the public contracts market; and 2) the growing number of exclusions from the procedures for the award of a public contract in connection with the alleged misleading practices of the contracting authority.

This legal uncertainty does not serve the participants of the public procurements market, and the practice of referring to this provision in proceedings seems to increasingly depart from the purpose which the provision was to serve.

The topics raised for discussion during the meeting will include:

• The role of the ESPD in the proceedings – is it justified to state all of the facts concerning the improper performance of the previous contract “irrespective of the reasons for which they occurred” or to complete the ESPD “from the perspective of a specific prerequisite for exclusion”?
• Is a contractual penalty tantamount to compensation?
• Does a contractual penalty that is questioned by the contractor fulfill the condition for exclusion (“has led to compensation” vs “adjudication of compensation”)?
• The significance of the settlement reached by the contracting authority and the contractor to evaluate the prerequisite under Art. 109 Sec. 1 point 7 PPA.
• Does the current wording of Art. 109 Sec. 1 point 7 PPA encourage conciliatory settlement of disputes between the contracting authority and the contractor in the context of the performance of a public procurement contract?
• Enforcement of the rights under warranty and improper performance of a material contractual obligation.
• Conclusions de lege lata and de lege ferenda.

The meeting will be hosted by Katarzyna Kuźma and Wojciech Merkwa, members of the Public Procurements Law Association.
The following guests will take part in the debate:

• Hubert Nowak, President of the Public Procurements Office
• Mariusz Haładyj, President of the State Treasury Solicitor’s Office and member of the Public Procurements Council
• Przemysław Grosfeld, Deputy Director of the Ministry of Development and member of the Public Procurements Council
• Małgorzata Śledziewska, Deputy Director of the Purchases Department at PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna S.A.
• A representative of the contractor Erbud S.A.

To find out more information and register, click here LINK.

Created: 16 December 2021

In the latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily on jurisprudence, the article “New PPL (Public Procurement Law): clarification of contract terms and conditions” was published, co-authored by Piotr Trębicki, a member of the Public Procurement Law Association.

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 13 December 2021

In the latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily on jurisprudence, the article “Consortium member's experience pays off” was published. The author of the article is Marzena Jaworska, a member of the Public Procurement Law Association.

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 02 December 2021

In the latest supplement to the Rzeczpospolita daily on jurisprudence, an article was published “Report on the performance of the contract - an important purchasing tool or unnecessary burden?”, the author of which is UMK’s professor, PhD Paweł Nowicki, a member of the Public Procurement Law Association.

You can read the publication by clicking here.

Created: 26 October 2021

On 26 October 2021 PPLA filed with the President of the Public Procurement Authority a request for the issuance of an opinion concerning the possibility to use the institution of remittance ( Polish: przekaz, in the meaning of the provisions of Art. 921(1) of the Civil Code) of the remuneration payable to the contractor by the contracting authority in the course of performance of the public procurement agreement, so as to cover the contractor’s debt resulting from sub-contracting agreements.

The request is driven by the doubts that arise with regard to the admissibility of using remittance and with regard to the relationship between the provisions of the Civil Code on remittance and the provisions of Public Procurement Law on direct payment to the subcontractor. A confirmation that it is possible to make payments to the subcontractors by way of remittance is of major importance for the execution of procurements for construction work. When the remittance is made the subcontractor effectively obtains the payment that is due to it. The contracting authority is, in turn, confident that payment to the subcontractor was actually made which releases it from the obligation to open the procedure of direct payment referred to in Art. 465 of Public Procurement Law and, with regard to the subcontractors performing construction work, also from the joint and several liability towards them under Art. 647(1) § 1 of the Civil Code.

Ultimately, a remittance is also advantageous for the contractor. The contractor may thus make payments to its subcontractors in a simplified manner without having to directly commit its own funds.

The text of the request is available here.

Created: 09 April 2021

The Public Procurement Law Association is pleased to invite you to a webinar on "Public procurement in the UK – has Brexit provoked any (substantial) changes?", which will be held on 22 April 2021 at 1:00 p.m. BST / 2 p.m. CEST.

Brexit is a massive social, economic and also legal challenge. Public procurement has been one of the heavily influenced sectors. We have the privilege of hosting Professor Sue Arrowsmith who has been deeply involved in the recent proposals for changes within the public procurement system in UK in the new era. Please join our webinar and stay updated.
The meeting will be held in English.

Webinar agenda:

• Public procurement in the UK after Brexit: award procedures and remedies
  • the current situation
  • the proposals for change in the Government’s December 2020 Green Paper
• The status of EU and third country contractors in the UK: legal rights and the situation in practice
  • above EU/GPA threshold contracts
  • below threshold contracts

Speaker: Professor Sue Arrowsmith QC (hon), BA, D Jur, MCIPS, Professor Emerita, School of Law, University of Nottingham
Moderator: Wojciech Hartung, PhD, member of the Public Procurement Law Association


About the Speaker:

Professor Sue Arrowsmith QC (hon) is Professor Emerita at the University of Nottingham. She has a B.A. (first class hons.) from Oxford University and a D.Jur from Osgoode Hall Law School and is a Member of the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply (MCIPS).

In 2007 she was awarded the CIPS Swinbank Medal for thought innovation in purchasing and supply and in 2019 was made an honorary Queens Counsel (QC) in recognition of her significant contribution to the development of the law of England and Wales in the field of public procurement.

She has been instrumental reforming public procurement rules and was a member of the UK’s Procurement Transformation Advisory Panel, advising on the development of the Government’s 2020 Green Paper, Transforming Public Procurement. She is also a member of the Government’s its Thematic Working Group on Procurement advising on public procurement rules in trade agreements and a Member of the Advisory Committee for the Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid. She has been a member of the UNCITRAL Procurement Experts Group, the World Bank International Advisory Group on Procurement, (for nearly 20 years) the European Commission's independent Advisory Committee on procurement, and an Expert with the International Partnership against Corruption in Sport (IPACS), Taskforce 1. She has also been consultant for the UK, UN, WTO, OECD, EU, European Central Bank, ILO and the Law Commission of England and Wales.

Her publications have been extensively cited by courts around the world. Her many books include (most recently) The Law of Public and Utilities Procurement (3rd ed. 2014 (Vol.1) and 2018 (vol.2)), which was described in 2018 by the domestic High Court as “the leading academic authority” and “highly persuasive” for the courts in making decisions in this field.

Date: April 22nd, 1.00-2.30 p.m. BST (2.00-3.30 p.m. CEST)
Registration

The meeting will be held in English on the Zoom platform. Participation in the webinar is free of charge.

Created: 01 April 2021

Thank you for taking part in the webinar: "Green Transition in Public Procurement". We would like to extend particular thanks to the speakers for an insightful and professional discussion.
If you were unable to attend the webinar live, you can still watch the recording at: https://youtu.be/kL_OAThQmsE

Created: 23 March 2021

Public Procurement Law Association warmly invites to open access webinar on "Green Transition in Public Procurement", which will be held on March 30, 2021 at 11:00 CET. 

The meeting will be held in English.

Webinar agenda:

• 11.00 Welcome on behalf of the Public Procurement Law Association
• 11.10 - 11.25 EU provisions and case law on GPP – Associate professor, Dr Marta Andhov, University of Copenhagen
• 11.25 - 11.40 What's on the horizon? The Future of Green Public Procurement requirements in the EU – Assistant professor, Dr Willem Janssen, Utrecht University
• 11.40 - 11.55 Interpretation of the link to the subject matter of the contract in practice – Dr Abby Semple, Public Procurement Analysis / Greenville Procurement Partners
• 11.55 – 12.10 What is the Status Quo of GPP in Poland? Professor Michal Kania, Silesian University
• 12.10-12.30 Discussion What's on the horizon? The Future of Green Public Procurement requirements in the EU – Assistant professor, Dr Willem Janssen, Utrecht University Public Procurement Analysis / Greenville Procurement Partners

Speakers:

• Dr Marta Andhov - an associate professor in public procurement law at the University of Copenhagen Faculty of Law. Her main research interests focus on sustainability and governmental contracts. She is a co-host of the Bestek Public Procurement Podcast, a steering committee member of the Horizon 2020 project the Sustainability and Procurement in International, European, and National Systems (SAPIENS). In the past, Marta has provided her insight and expertise to key research projects for the European Commission, Danish Institute for Human Rights and multiple organisations and national procurement agencies. She is a well established and respected authority in sustainable public procurement with a vast publication list in leading journals and publishing houses. Her 2019 co-edited book, Cost and EU Public Procurement Law – Life-Cycle Costing for Sustainability, contributes to developing life-cycle criteria tools and public procurement methodologies in the EU. It includes both sector-crossing contributions, analysing the most relevant theoretical and legal aspects such as EU law and contract theory, and sector-specific contributions to some of the most important sustainable goods and services markets.
  
  
• Dr Willem A. Janssen - an Assistant Professor in European and Dutch Public Procurement Law at the law department of Utrecht University, and a researcher at the Centre for Public Procurement and RENFORCE.  In addition to his monologue ‘EU Public Procurement Law & Self-organisation’, he has published extensively in international and Dutch academic journals on pressing issues related to cooperation, sustainability, and societal value in the context of Dutch and EU public procurement law. Having been a visiting fellow at George Washington University, he is currently a visiting fellow at Copenhagen University in 2020-2021 and guest lectures at various universities and public institutions. He co-hosts Bestek – the Public Procurement Podcast, actively contributes to the public debate through various blogs and columns and aims to improve public procurement law and practice through his academic work.  
  
  

• Abby Semple, LL.B., Ph.D. - a consultant advising public bodies on strategic and legal aspects of procurement. Her main focus is on the environmental and social impact of public contracts and how these can be meaningfully addressed through the contracting process. Through her consultancy Public Procurement Analysis, Abby has managed complex tenders on behalf of public sector clients in Ireland and the UK, and developed policy and guidance at the EU level and in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, Ukraine and the United States. Her writing and speaking engages with academic and practitioner audiences, including over 80 presentations and training sessions throughout Europe and the world. Abby is the author of one of the first books on the 2014 EU Procurement Directives A Practical Guide to Public Procurement, published by Oxford University Press in 2015. Her academic writing on topics including living wages and citizen participation in public contracts can be accessed on SSRN.
  
  
• Prof. Michał Kania - professor at the University of Silesia in Poland, an attorney-at-law with 15 years of practical experience in PPP, public procurement and concession contracts, a member of the Just Transition Research Group at the University of Silesia. An active member of the Public Procurement Association in Poland, a Visiting Fulbright Scholar at George Washington University (2018-2019), a Fellow of the German Academic Exchange Service at the Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich (2017), the author of more than 100 publications regarding PPP, public procurement law, administrative law and administrative procedure, a speaker at Polish and international conferences, a founder and lecturer at the Postgraduate Studies in Public-Private Partnership and Public Procurement at the University of Silesia, a founder and the first president of the PPP Academic Support Foundation, a founder of the programme ‘’PPP – Good Choice’’ (active in the years 2009 – 2014), a former president of the PPP Commission by the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland, an independent adviser for the Polish Ministry of Development for the concept of the new Polish Public Procurement Act adopted on 11 September 2019, plenipotentiary of the President of the University of Silesia for PPP projects, MBA, with the final thesis entitled “Economic and financial analyses in public – private partnership projects.” 
  
  

Date: March 30, 2021 | 11:00 – 12:30 CET

Link to the Zoom Webinar (registration is not required).

The meeting will be held in English on the Zoom platform. Participation in the conference is free of charge.

Created: 08 June 2020

On 1 June 2020, the final oral part of the moot court competition entitled “Client Representation before the KIO National Appeals Chamber” for students of Law and Administration Faculties, was held at the Warsaw offices of WKB Wierciński, Kwieciński, Baehr.

The competition was organized by the Public Procurement Law Association. The competition award winners will get the chance to take part in trainee programs in law firms supporting the competition, such as Bird & Bird, BSJP, Clifford Chance, Dentons, Domański Zakrzewski Palinka, Jerzykowski i Wspólnicy, Schampera Dubis Zając i Wspólnicy, Wardyński i Wspólnicy, and WKB Wierciński Kwieciński Baehr.

The following four universities entered their teams into the competition:

Mickiewicz University, Poznan (Supervisors: Prof. UAM Dr hab. Katarzyna Kokocińska, Dr Jarosław Kola), Jagiellonian University (Supervisor: Dr Aleksandra Sołtysińska), University of Lodz (Supervisor: Dr Anna Górczyńska), University of Warsaw (Supervisor: Dr hab. Piotr Bogdanowicz).

The competition was staged in two phases:

• a written part, in which contestants submitted procedural briefs (appeals and rejoinders to appeals).
• an oral part, in which teams (orators) represented their clients at a mock trial before the KIO.

The teams’ ranking following the written part of the competition was as follows:

1. University of Warsaw,
2. Jagiellonian University,
3. Mickiewicz University, Poznan,
4. University of Lodz

The briefs were evaluated in terms of the quality of the legal argumentation presented, formal correctness, as well as an unmistakable flair for polemics.
Based on these criteria, the submissions drafted by the University of Warsaw’s team received the highest score.

According to the Rules of the Competition, oral performance received twice as many points as the written part. For this reason, the oral phase was crucial for the final outcome.

During the final part of the competition, the teams took part in a mock trial before the KIO, acting as the parties’ counsel. The teams’ performance was evaluated by a panel consisting of Sylwester Kuchnio, Esq. (Chair), Aldona Kowalczyk, Esq. and Jan Roliński, Esq.
The atmosphere of the finale bore striking resemblance to that of a real court battle before the KIO, the participants showing a high level of preparation for the hearings and full professionalism in the speeches they delivered.

When assessing oral presentations, the jurors took into account the substantive level of the speeches as well as the rhetorical skills of the respective speakers. Highest scores were given for prompt and apposite retorts, and to speakers who managed to keep their cool and come up with creative solutions in unforeseen courtroom situations (e.g. in answers to questions asked by the adjudicating panel).

Conversely, speakers who repeated the arguments presented in the pleadings parrot fashion, excessively focused on allegations that were irrelevant for the outcome of the case, reviewed their opponents’ briefs instead of fighting the substantive accusations that they contained, and especially those reading prewritten speeches, were given fewer points.

Upon adding up the scores for the written and oral parts, the final results of the Moot Court competition are as follows:

1. Mickiewicz University, Poznan
2. Jagiellonian University
3. ex aequo University of Warsaw and University of Lodz

Congratulations to all Winners and Participants!

Created: 26 February 2020

In keeping with the Rules of the “Client Representation before the KIO National Appeals Chamber” competition, announced by the Public Procurement Law Association, we present four teams which signed up for the competition, team draw results and the competition’s case studies.

Team A – Mickiewicz University, Poznan (Supervisors: prof. Dr hab. Katarzyna Kokocińska, Jarosław Kola)
o Aleksandra Grabowska
o Alicja Sementina
o Filip Golędzinowski
o Łukasz Wasilenko
o Maciej Kowalczyk

Team B – University of Warsaw (Supervisor: Dr hab. Piotr Bogdanowicz)
o Eryk Ryciak
o Marcin Woźny
o Agnieszka Warsewicz
o Mateusz Mućka
o Adam Jeżewski
o Marta Radke

Team C – Jagiellonian University (Supervisor: Dr Aleksandra Sołtysińska)
o Tomasz Mielko
o Maciej Gilis-Januszewski
o Michał Kulikowski
o Kinga Kanecka
o Rafał Rutkowski
o Karol Witas

Team D – University of Lodz (Supervisor: Dr Anna Górczyńska)
o Julia Bilska
o Magdalena Rogozińska
o Maria Szychowska
o Adam Kramarz
o Katarzyna Leszka

Click here to download case studies. See below for teams assigned to each individual case:

More information on the competition, time schedule and the Competition Rules are available here.

Created: 10 February 2020

The third General Meeting of the Members of the Public Procurement Law Association took place on 3 February 2020 at the premises of Dentons. The Meeting was an opportunity to recap the activities undertaken by the Association in 2019 and discuss the projects due to be implemented in 2020.

Members of the Association further discussed the upcoming initiatives organized or co-organized by the Public Procurement Law Association, which included, among others, the conference “on effective contract administration and dispute resolution – keys to innovation and environmental sustainability in public procurement practice” to be held on 18 March 2020 in Warsaw, as well as a moot court student competition, “Legal Representation before the National Appeals Chamber”. The meeting ended with a discussion on the merits and exchange of knowledge on selected aspects of the new Public Procurement Law.

We appreciate our Members’ active participation in the Meeting.

Created: 31 January 2020

Due to the situation caused by the Covid virus, travel alerts, questions from our participants and sponsors the organizers took the decision to postpone the Transatlantic conference on effective contract administration and dispute resolution – keys to innovation and environmental sustainability in public procurement practice, which was planned on March, 18 at the University of Warsaw.

This decision has been taken due to the protection of the participant’s comfort and health as well as due to the best understanding of sponsors and partners reputation. The new term of this event is planned for September 30, 2020 and will be announced soon.

We are pleased to invite you to a conference to be held on 18 March 2020 in Warsaw by the "Pro Silesia" Association, the University of Silesia in Katowice, the University of Warsaw, the George Washington University in Washington and the Public Procurement Law Association (PPLA):

"TRANSATLANTIC CONFERENCE: on effective contract administration and
dispute resolution – keys to innovation and environmental sustainability in public procurement practice"

The conference will focus on practical aspects of the implementation of public contracts and the resolution of disputes arising from these contracts in terms ofinnovation and environmental sustainability. The event partner is Tauron Polska Energia S.A. and the conference is held under the patronage of the Fulbright Poland foundation. The event will be attended by representatives of public institutions and Polish and foreign public procurement experts.

Simultaneous interpretation into English will be provided. The number of places is limited.

Here you can find more details and registration information.

Created: 08 January 2020

The Public Procurement Law Association would like to invite students of Law and Administration Faculties to take part in the moot court competition entitled: “Client Representation before the KIO National Appeals Chamber”.

The competitors will take part in simulated KIO appellate proceedings concerning cases typically regulated by Public Procurement Law.

The competition’s award winners will get the chance to take part in trainee programs in one of the law firms supporting the competition, such as Bird & Bird, BSJP, Clifford Chance, Dentons, Domański Zakrzewski Palinka, Schampera Dubis Zając i Wspólnicy, Wardyński i Wspólnicy, and WKB Wierciński Kwieciński Baehr.

Our invitation is extended to teams of 2-6 students selected in qualifications run by participating universities, namely the Jagiellonian University (supervisor: Dr Aleksandra Sołtysińska), the University of Warsaw (supervisor: Dr hab. Piotr Bogdanowicz), the University of Lodz (supervisor: Dr Anna Górczyńska) and Poznan’s Mickiewicz University (prof. Dr hab. Katarzyna Kokocińska and Jarosław Kola).

Timeline:

• 21 February 2020 –qualification finals, selection of university team members
• 24 February 2020 – cases published on www.stowarzyszeniepzp.pl, adversary teams drawn
• 2 March 2020 – deadline for teams to ask questions regarding their cases
• 9 March 2020 – deadline for answering questions
• 27 April 2020 – date for teams to send in appeals (initial procedural brief)
• 29 April 2020 – names of jurors revealed
• 11 May 2020 – date for sending appeals to the jury
• 18 May 2020 – date for teams to send replies to the appeals (second procedural brief), which shall be forwarded to the jury immediately
• 1 June 2020 – oral phase
  
  More information available in the Competition Rules (click here).
  The Competition is organized by the Public Procurement Law Association.

Created: 03 January 2020

To mark World Competition Day, the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection organized a conference styled “Effective Counteracting Market Conspiracy – Practice and Challenges” on 10 December 2019.

Aldona Kowalczyk, President of the Management Board of the Public Procurement Law Association, was invited by the Chairperson of the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection to attend a discussion panel on “How to eliminate bid rigging. Synergy actions under competition law, public procurement law and criminal law”.

The conference was attended by representatives of the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection and the Public Procurement Office, law enforcement authorities as well as businessmen and lawyers. Foreign experts included representatives of the European Commission, the Czech and the Israeli Competition Authorities.
More information about the conference agenda is available here.

Images received from the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection.

Created: 31 October 2019

The October issue of “Zamówienia Publiczne DORADCA” monthly featured a report from the conference “Grounds for exclusion – practice followed in the EU and EFTA member states and the U.S.” presenting conclusions and selected parts of the report depicting the system of exclusions of contractors from public procurement procedures in Poland compared to the systems binding in other European states. The report was prepared by the Polish Public Procurement Association. The report along with other publications featured in the October issue of the DORADCA monthly will be available in just a few days in the LEGALIS Legal Information System.