NEWS
Ministry of Economic Development makes such a conclusion, established in Sec. 15 of the Notes to the form of the schedule of placing orders (approved. Order of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia N 761, the Treasury of Russia N 20N from 27.12.2011). In accordance with this paragraph, the schedule are made correct, including a change of the planned method of purchase.
On 01.09.2014 enacted National Standard GOST R 56002-2014 "Evaluation of experience and reputation building organizations." The standard establishes requirements, models and evaluation criteria goodwill construction companies. The standard helps to ensure a unified approach to the objective rankings and choice of construction companies in the tendering of any kind and level. This standard allows to simplify the collection, analysis and assessment of the documents of bidders by setting objective conformity assessment procedures.
From 13th of the August the purchase can not become a legal entity that is registered in the offshore zone. State or Territory relating to such zones are included in the list approved in accordance with paragraphs.1 pt. 3 of Art. 284 Tax Code of the Russian Federation.
State procurement Committee of the Republic of Tatarstan and its subordinate State unitary enterprise of the Republic of Tatarstan "Procurement Development Centre of the Republic of Tatarstan" is condacted automated testing determine the customers level of knowledge of normative legal acts regulating relations in the field of procurement of goods, works and services for state and municipal needs.
This conclusion will help to put into practice the provisions p. 7, Art. 95 of the Law N 44-FL, which provide for consultation with the customer to deliver the goods (works, services) with improved characteristics compared with those in the contract.
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.