Advanced

Referenser vid utvärdering?

Jungmann, Martin LU (2011) JURM01 20102
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Det är inte ovanligt att upphandlande myndigheter använder sig av referenser i upphandlingsprocessen. Ett exempel är att den upphandlande myndigheten ställer krav på att anbudsgivarna ska presentera referenser, exempelvis om hur en tjänst likartad den som offereras i upphandlingen tidigare har utförts eller referenser som styrker krav på en viss kompetens. Det är då fråga om referenser i form av kvalifikationskrav avseende anbudsgivaren (kvalifikationsfasen). Det förekommer även att referenser också används vid utvärderingen av anbuden (utvärderingsfasen). Detta kan i praktiken ske på många olika sätt men som exempel kan nämnas att frågor ibland anges i förfrågningsunderlaget som kommer att ställas till representanterna för angivna... (More)
Det är inte ovanligt att upphandlande myndigheter använder sig av referenser i upphandlingsprocessen. Ett exempel är att den upphandlande myndigheten ställer krav på att anbudsgivarna ska presentera referenser, exempelvis om hur en tjänst likartad den som offereras i upphandlingen tidigare har utförts eller referenser som styrker krav på en viss kompetens. Det är då fråga om referenser i form av kvalifikationskrav avseende anbudsgivaren (kvalifikationsfasen). Det förekommer även att referenser också används vid utvärderingen av anbuden (utvärderingsfasen). Detta kan i praktiken ske på många olika sätt men som exempel kan nämnas att frågor ibland anges i förfrågningsunderlaget som kommer att ställas till representanterna för angivna referenskunder. Upphandlande myndigheter rör ibland ihop referensernas innehåll och använder sig i vissa fall av referenserna som kvalifikationskrav avseende anbudsgivaren som sådan och i vissa fall som ett utvärderingskriterium. Frågan om användning av referenser i anbudsutvärdering är starkt förknippad med skillnaden mellan de krav som kan ställas i kvalificeringsfasen och utvärderingsfasen. Då lagen om offentlig upphandling inte ger någon vägledning i frågan har det växt fram praxis som förtydligar frågeställningen. I målet Beentjes-målet (C-31/87) klargjordes bland annat att utvärderingen och kvalificeringen kan ske vid samma tillfälle men ska ses som två skilda moment där olika regler är tillämpliga. I svensk rätt regleras dessa två olika moment i 11 kap. LOU respektive 12 kap. LOU. Domstolen framhävde att anbudsgivarnas lämplighet endast kan kontrolleras genom att ställa krav i upphandlingen som är relaterade till anbudsgivarens ekonomiska och finansiella eller tekniska kapacitet och förmåga. I målen Lianakis klargjorde EG-domstolen och hänvisade i målet till sin tidigare praxis, till det s.k. Beentjes-målet (C-31/87), att det följer av rättspraxis att även om det teoretiskt inte är uteslutet att kontrollen av anbudsgivarnas lämplighet och tilldelning av kontrakt kan äga rum samtidigt, står det klart att det är fråga om två skilda moment som omfattas av olika bestämmelser. EG-domstolen klargjorde att den upphandlande myndigheten vid kontrollen av anbudsgivarens lämplighet har att utgå från kriterierna avseende ekonomisk och finansiell ställning samt teknisk kapacitet och att tilldelningen av kontrakt ska genomföras mot bakgrund av andra kriterier, nämligen lägsta pris eller det ekonomiskt mest fördelaktiga anbudet. Vidare förtydligade EG-domstolen att det i sistnämnda fall, d.v.s. avseende utvärderingsfasen, inte ges någon uttömmande uppräkning av de kriterier som den upphandlande myndigheten får välja mellan, men att valet endast kan avse kriterier som syftar till att fastställa det ekonomiskt mest fördelaktiga anbudet. EG-domstolen angav att kriterier som huvudsakligen avser en bedömningen av anbudsgivarnas förmåga att utföra projektet i fråga följaktligen inte kan anses utgöra "kriterier för tilldelning". Efter Lianakis-domen har det ifrågasatts om referenser över huvud taget får beaktas vid utvärderingen av anbud och frågan har prövats ibland annat ett flertal kammarrättsavgöranden. I svensk rättspraxis har dock Lianakis-domen tolkats på olika sätt av kammarrätterna. Sammanfattningsvis står idag klart att det inte finns något hinder mot att använda referenser vid utvärderingen så länge dessa syftar till att fastställa det ekonomiskt mest fördelaktiga anbudet. En viktig slutsats är att om referenser skall utvärderas skall dessa ha en tydlig koppling till exempelvis den tjänst som skall utföras och inte till anbudsgivaren som sådan. (Less)
Abstract
It is not uncommon for contracting authorities make use of references in the procurement process. One example is that the contracting authority requires that bidders must present credentials, such as how a service similar to that quoted in the contract has been experienced or references proving the requirement for a specific skill. This is then a question of credentials in the form of qualification requirements for the bidder (qualification phase). References are also used in the evaluation of bids (evaluation phase). This may in practice be done in many different ways, but as an example, questions are sometimes stated in the specifications that will be made to the representatives of the specified reference customers. Contracting... (More)
It is not uncommon for contracting authorities make use of references in the procurement process. One example is that the contracting authority requires that bidders must present credentials, such as how a service similar to that quoted in the contract has been experienced or references proving the requirement for a specific skill. This is then a question of credentials in the form of qualification requirements for the bidder (qualification phase). References are also used in the evaluation of bids (evaluation phase). This may in practice be done in many different ways, but as an example, questions are sometimes stated in the specifications that will be made to the representatives of the specified reference customers. Contracting authorities sometimes mix up the references, the content and use of some of the references relating to qualification requirements for the bidder as such, and in some cases as an evaluation criterion. The question of the use of references in the tender evaluation is strongly associated with the difference between the obligations required in the qualification phase and evaluation phase. Since the Public Procurement Act provides no guidance on this issue there has evolved a practice that clarify the issue. In Beentjes case (C-31/87) was clarified, inter alia, that the classification and evaluation can be done at the same time, but should be viewed as two different operations in which different rules apply. These operations are ruled by the 11th. and the 12th chapter of Swedish procurement Act . The court stressed that the suitability of tenders can only be verified by requiring the contract related to the candidate's economic and financial or technical capacity. The Lianakis case (C-532/06) clarified and referred the case back to its previous practice, the so-called Beentjes case (C-31/87), that it follows from the law that even if it theoretically is possible that the verification of the suitability of tenders and the award of contract can take place simultaneously, it is clear that there are two distinct elements subject to different rules. The Court made clear that the contracting authority for verification of applicant's suitability has to be based on criteria of economic and financial standing, technical capacity and that the award of contracts will be implemented according to other criteria, namely, the lowest price or most economically advantageous tender. Further the Court clarified that in the latter case, i.e. regarding the evaluation stage, not be an exhaustive list of criteria the contracting authority may choose, but that choice may be based only criteria is to determine the most economically advantageous tender. The Court stated that the criteria which relate mainly to an assessment of the renderers ability to carry out the project in question can not therefore be regarded as the criteria for the award. After Lianakis ruling it has been uncertain if references at all may be considered in the evaluation of tenders and the issue has been examined among other things in a number of appeal decisions. In Swedish jurisprudence, however the Lianakis ruling has been interpreted differently by the administrative courts. In conclusion, it is now clear that there is no impediment to the use of references in the evaluation as long as those designed to determine the most economically advantageous tender. Another important conclusion is that when references are to be evaluated, these have to have a clear link to the example of the services to be performed and not to the bidder as such. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Jungmann, Martin LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM01 20102
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
language
Swedish
id
1764277
date added to LUP
2011-01-19 16:47:46
date last changed
2011-01-19 16:47:46
@misc{1764277,
  abstract     = {It is not uncommon for contracting authorities make use of references in the procurement process. One example is that the contracting authority requires that bidders must present credentials, such as how a service similar to that quoted in the contract has been experienced or references proving the requirement for a specific skill. This is then a question of credentials in the form of qualification requirements for the bidder (qualification phase). References are also used in the evaluation of bids (evaluation phase). This may in practice be done in many different ways, but as an example, questions are sometimes stated in the specifications that will be made to the representatives of the specified reference customers. Contracting authorities sometimes mix up the references, the content and use of some of the references relating to qualification requirements for the bidder as such, and in some cases as an evaluation criterion. The question of the use of references in the tender evaluation is strongly associated with the difference between the obligations required in the qualification phase and evaluation phase. Since the Public Procurement Act provides no guidance on this issue there has evolved a practice that clarify the issue. In Beentjes case (C-31/87) was clarified, inter alia, that the classification and evaluation can be done at the same time, but should be viewed as two different operations in which different rules apply. These operations are ruled by the 11th. and the 12th chapter of Swedish procurement Act . The court stressed that the suitability of tenders can only be verified by requiring the contract related to the candidate's economic and financial or technical capacity. The Lianakis case (C-532/06) clarified and referred the case back to its previous practice, the so-called Beentjes case (C-31/87), that it follows from the law that even if it theoretically is possible that the verification of the suitability of tenders and the award of contract can take place simultaneously, it is clear that there are two distinct elements subject to different rules. The Court made clear that the contracting authority for verification of applicant's suitability has to be based on criteria of economic and financial standing, technical capacity and that the award of contracts will be implemented according to other criteria, namely, the lowest price or most economically advantageous tender. Further the Court clarified that in the latter case, i.e. regarding the evaluation stage, not be an exhaustive list of criteria the contracting authority may choose, but that choice may be based only criteria is to determine the most economically advantageous tender. The Court stated that the criteria which relate mainly to an assessment of the renderers ability to carry out the project in question can not therefore be regarded as the criteria for the award. After Lianakis ruling it has been uncertain if references at all may be considered in the evaluation of tenders and the issue has been examined among other things in a number of appeal decisions. In Swedish jurisprudence, however the Lianakis ruling has been interpreted differently by the administrative courts. In conclusion, it is now clear that there is no impediment to the use of references in the evaluation as long as those designed to determine the most economically advantageous tender. Another important conclusion is that when references are to be evaluated, these have to have a clear link to the example of the services to be performed and not to the bidder as such.},
  author       = {Jungmann, Martin},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Referenser vid utvärdering?},
  year         = {2011},
}