The notification about signing the state contract got into spam — there are no reasons not to include information in the RNP
The winner did not sign the contract on time and did not provide its security. He explained that the notification about the need to sign the contract was automatically sent to the "spam" email. Despite this argument, information about the winner was included in the RNP. The winner did not agree. However, the courts did not support it:
by submitting an application, the participant bears the risk of consequences if they fail to fulfill their obligations;
the winner acted negligently, because he did not take measures for the proper conclusion of the contract: there was no draft, no Protocol of disagreements;
making a Deposit does not justify the winner, because they did it late.
Note that in similar circumstances, information is not always included in the register. There are such examples in administrative practice. For example, the Chelyabinsk FAS considered that the winner did not want to evade: he signed a contract, albeit late. In addition, he provided information on four completed contracts.
The Arkhangelsk Federal Antimonopoly service also did not include information in the register: the security was entered, albeit late. The winner sent an explanation to the customer and confirmed their intention to fulfill the contract.
Document: Resolution of the AC of the North Caucasus district of 19.11.2020 on the case N A32-2635/2020