Суды: совпадения IP-адресов и идентичности заявок недостаточно для вывода о сговоре в госзакупках

2 July 2020, Thursday

The supervisory authority decided that 2 procurement participants entered into an antitrust agreement for several auctions. The controller was guided by the following:
participants submitted bids and price offers using a single infrastructure (IP-addresses);
Requirement file properties match;
participants refused to compete with each other with participation in a number of auctions;
NMCC was reduced minimally;
there is a relationship between the participants: the directors of organizations are spouses and belong to the same group of persons under the Law on Protection of Competition.
However, the courts did not agree with the antimonopoly authority. In their opinion, the coincidence of IP addresses and properties of application files is not enough to conclude that the companies have entered into an anticompetitive agreement.
The control body did not indicate in the decision a specific model or pattern of behavior of the participants, did not establish the purpose and economic feasibility of the conspiracy. In addition, suspected organizations in the bidding process competed with other bidders. Contracts with one of the accused organizations are concluded with different levels of price drops and are fully executed.
With regard to the interconnection of procurement participants, the courts recalled an explanation of the FAS: the simultaneous participation in the procurement of members of one group of persons, if they are not under the control of one person, does not mean that there is an anticompetitive agreement between them.
Document: Resolution of the AC of the Volga-Vyatka District of 06/09/2020 in the case of N A38-6825 / 2019