The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation confirmed what losses can be recovered from the state customer if the purchase was canceled due to his fault
The auction winner provided an independent guarantee and signed the contract on time. The customer did not do this, did not report the reasons.
Later it was found out that the inspectors ordered to cancel the results of the purchase due to violations of the customer. The winner demanded to reimburse the costs of issuing a guarantee. The customer refused: the state contract was not concluded, the guarantee was not valid, the commission should be demanded from the bank.
Three instances collected from the customer the costs of issuing a guarantee and partially paying for the services of a representative:
the winner fulfilled his obligations, but the purchase was canceled due to the fault of the customer. Because of this, the winner had losses;
the customer behaved in bad faith. He was given an order, but he did not inform the winner about it, while agreeing on the text of the guarantee the next day;
until the notice of cancellation of the auction was published on the electronic platform, the winner did not know that the results of the purchase were appealed, and the customer was ordered to cancel them.
The RF Armed Forces did not review the case.
Earlier, the Supreme Court, in similar circumstances, supported the lower instances and charged the customer a commission for issuing a guarantee, since the purchase was canceled through his fault. They did not require compensation for the services of a representative at that time. The ACE of the North-Western District recently came to similar conclusions.