We wish to notify the users that, due to constant technical problems, we have switched to another SMS service provider. Following this switch, two-factor authentication was turned back on. This means that the bidders’ users can now access the system with their respective user names and passwords as well as their respective SMS codes.

We wish you plenty of successful bids!

The European Commission adopted Directive No. 1336/2013 changing the thresholds above which the contracting authorities must publish procurement notices in the Official Journal of the European Union.

The thresholds were changed as follows:

• from EUR 130,000 to EUR 134,000 (goods and services under ZJN-2 procured by state bodies),
• from EUR 200,000 to EUR 207,000 (goods and services under ZJN-2 procured by other contracting authorities),
• from EUR 400,000 to EUR 414,000 (goods and services under ZJNVETPS and ZJNPOV),
• from EUR 5,000,000 to EUR 5,186,000 (works under ZJN-2, ZJNVETPS and ZJNPOV).

Regardless of the provisions of ZJN-2, ZJNVETPS and ZJNPOV, the contracting authorities must apply the new thresholds as of 1 January 2014.

On 30 November 2012, the Public Procurement for Defence and Security Act (ZJNPOV) was published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia (No. 90/2012).

On 30 November 2012, the Act Amending the Public Procurement Act (ZJN-2D) and the Act Amending the Act Regulating Public Procurement in the Water, Energy, Transport and Postal Services Sectors (ZJNVETPS-D) were published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia (No. 90/2012).

On 24 May 2012, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia published its Decision following a constitutional review, ruling that Article 42, Paragraph 4, Indent 2 of the Public Procurement Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia Nos. 128/06, 16/08, 19/10 and 18/11) and Article 47, Paragraph 3 and Article 48, Paragraph 4 of the Act Regulating Public Procurement in the Water, Energy, Transport and Postal Services Sectors (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia No. 72/11) be repealed.

The European Commission adopted Decision 1251/2011 of 30 November 2011 amending Directives 2004/17/EC, 2004/18/EC and 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council in respect of their application thresholds for the procedures for the awards of contracts changing the thresholds above which the contracting authorities must publish public procurement notices in the Official Journal of the European Union. The thresholds were changed as follows:
– from EUR 125,000 to EUR 130,000,
– from EUR 193,000 to EUR 200,000,
– from EUR 387,000 to EUR 400,000,
– from EUR 4,845,000 to EUR 5,000,000.

The contracting authorities must apply the new thresholds as of 1 January 2012.

In case 018-357/2011, the National Review Commission for Reviewing Public Procurement Award Procedures found that it is unjustifiably discriminatory if the contracting authority tests samples of the other bidders’ items while failing to test the samples of the selected bidder for reasons of of already being familiar with them:

The National Review Commission went on to consider the claimant’s allegations that the contracting authority was in breach of the principle of equal treatment of bidders on the grounds of having failed to test the samples in lot 1 for the selected bidder.
The enclosed documentation shows that the contracting authority failed to test the samples in lot 1 for the selected bidder as the selected bidder provided samples of the same products that the contracting authority is currently using. In its decision on the application for review, the contracting authority did state that it had thoroughly examined the samples of the selected bidder, but only after reaching the decision on the award of the contract, and established that it met all the contracting authority’s requirements. The National Review Commission did not take these conclusions into account as the contracting authority failed to provide any proof thereof, in addition to these conclusions being reached too late. Articles 79 and 80 of ZJN-2 require the contracting authority to verify the completeness of tenders (i. e. including their appropriateness) before reaching their decision on the award of a contract and not later. 
The National Review Commission finds that, by failing to test the samples in lot 1 for the selected bidder, the contracting authority breached the principle of equal treatment of bidders (Article 9 of ZJN-2) under which the contracting authority must ensure that there is no discrimination between bidders in any stage of the public procurement procedure or regarding any element. By examining the samples of the claimant and the other bidders, but not those of the selected bidder, in order to verify the tenders’ appropriateness, the contracting authority did in fact discriminate between these bidders and the selected bidder.

More about the case: 018-357/2011

From the current practice of the National Review Commission: In case no. 018-360/2011, the National Review Commission found that a bidder whose tender has demonstrably been marked as unacceptable no longer has the legal standing to initiate proceedings seeking to establish the incompleteness of the selected tender:

In its application for review, the claimant also alleges certain violations on the part of the contracting authority pertaining to the establishment of the completeness of the selected bidder’s tender. However, with regard to the claimant’s review allegations, the National Review Commission refers the claimant to Article 14, Paragraph 1 of ZPVPJN which provides that legal standing is recognised for anyone who has or had an interest in the award of a contract or who can or could suffer damage as a result of the alleged violation. Pursuant to Article 14, Paragraph 1 of  ZPVPJN, it is the established practice of the National Review Commission of no longer recognising the second element of legal standing, i. e. the actual degree of likelihood of damage, for a bidder whose tender was found to be unacceptable and, as a result, incomplete, in the public procurement procedure  and the review did not show any violations on the part of the contracting authority in reaching such decision. If, based on the established facts, the tender cannot be regarded as acceptable or complete, it must be excluded pursuant to Article 80, Paragraph 1 of ZJN-2. This means that such a bidder (even if the latter’s allegations regarding other violations in the public procurement procedure proved to be well-founded) in fact has no chance of being selected as the best bidder in the relevant (concrete) public procurement procedure, as a result of which it did not and could not suffer any damage due to the alleged irregularities concerning the relevant public procurement procedure with respect to the grounds for the exclusion of its tender based on unacceptability. In light of the foregoing, the claimant’s legal interest in a judgement on the merits of the part of the application for review in which the claimant alleges the incompleteness of the selected bidder’s tender cannot be recognised.

More about the case: 018-360/2011