Inappropriate to requires that the equipment was owned by the participant,

It can be concluded from the Decision of the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and Leningrad region.

The competition authority has recognized the customer violated the law N 44-FL, as he set a requirement of the participant equipment in the property. The customer did not agree with the decision of FAS and appeal to the court.

The court did not satisfy the requirements of the customer. Conditions under which the necessary equipment should be a participant on the property right, is unlawful. No other legal basis for the use of equipment (such as rent) documentation was not provided.

Аs pointed out by the court, his criterion is set by the customer in violation of p. 7 h. 6, Art. 83 of the Law N 44-FL and p. 27 of the Rules of applications evaluation, the final proposals of the participants of purchase (app. RF Government Decree of 28.11.2013 N 1085). These rules do not imply that the customer may provide restrictions on a given rise to the right of the equipment used by the participants of purchase.