NEWS

Since May 3, 2022, all Russian organizations, including customers under laws No. 44-FZ and 223-FZ, are prohibited from entering into transactions with companies and individuals who are under Russian sanctions, and with persons controlled by them. In addition, with the listed participants, it is impossible to:
execute transactions that were concluded but not executed before May 3, 2022;
conduct financial transactions;
to export goods and raw materials for them.

The antimonopoly authority received a complaint: the customer incorrectly set additional requirements for the participants of the purchase for the overhaul of the bridge.
The customer decided that the work was related to road activities, and established additional requirements in this area.
The controllers did not agree with him:
the bridge is an independent object of capital construction. When purchasing work on its repair, additional requirements are established in the field of urban planning (work on the overhaul of the capital construction facility, except for linear);

The customer purchased design and survey work. According to the terms of the purchase, the participant must be in two SRO: in the field of engineering surveys and architectural and construction design.
The supervisors saw a violation in the fact that the requirement for membership in the SRO in the field of engineering research restricts competition. Survey work is not an independent object of purchase, they can be performed with the help of subcontractors participating in the necessary SRO.
The courts did not agree with them, because:

The application of the participant in the purchase of school catering services was rejected for non-compliance with the additional requirements: the price of the confirming contract was less than 20% of the NMCC.

The documentation established the requirement that participants from among the MSPs have the status of a manufacturer of goods or a dealer. If there is no such status, you need to get documents from them to confirm the right to supply.

The contractor performed part of the work in violation of the deadline. The customer accrued penalties, and the parties terminated the contract by agreement.

The parties signed a contract for the work. According to him, the result must be submitted by December 20. We did it almost a year later.
The customer has accrued penalties since December 20: in his opinion, the preposition "before" means the end of the term on December 19. The contractor did not pay them. The customer appealed to the court.
The courts supported him, but corrected the calculation of the penalty, because:
the deadline for the completion of works is until December 20. So, the delay could not have occurred earlier than December 21;

Since the beginning of March, a decree has been in effect on the non-placement of information on certain purchases in the EIS, namely:
customers under sanctions and (or) restrictions (including credit organizations);
credit institutions, if such measures have been introduced against the persons who control them.
The Ministry of Finance, among other things, clarified that in other cases these rules are not used. For example, when purchasing by a subsidiary, if the shares in its authorized capital belong to the customer under sanctions and this customer is not a credit institution.
There is no list of customers against whom restrictive measures have been established. Innovations are applied:

The contractor completed the design work, but did not receive the conclusion of the state expert examination, because its cost has risen significantly: due to additional work, the result was handed over after the prices were changed. The Company asked the customer to increase the contract price and extend the term.
The customer did not do this and terminated the transaction unilaterally. Among other things , he explained: according to the terms of the contract, it is necessary to obtain a positive expert opinion, without it, the works have no consumer value. The contractor appealed to the court.
The court refused. The appeal and cassation supported the contractor and collected the main debt minus the examination, the fee for the services of a representative, because:
the absence of a positive conclusion does not mean that you do not have to pay for the work actually performed. Their result has value for the customer. He can use it when signing a contract with another contractor;

Anti-crisis measures - 2022 Law No. 44-FZ Contract (44-FZ) Sole Supplier
On April 20, amendments were adopted in the first reading, including to Law No. 44-FZ.
Now it is possible to purchase medicines, medical products and consumables in a non-competitive way according to clause 5.1 of Part 1 of Article 93 of Law No. 44-FZ, subject to a number of conditions. State or municipal medical organizations have such an opportunity.
The government, in particular, offered to allow other customers to purchase on the specified basis. Medical products and consumables can be purchased according to the rules of the "electronic store".