Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KHO:1997:63 AI generated

Public procurement contract award based on total economic advantage is allowed if treated equally and without discrimination.

Case Number KHO:1997:63
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Administrative Court allowed Company B's appeal regarding the award of a helicopter surveillance contract to Company A. The court found that the authority correctly selected the bidder by comparing total economic advantage, a method permitted under the Public Procurement Act. The decision upheld that this approach complied with the requirements of equal and non-discriminatory treatment provided the evaluation criteria were applied fairly.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

L julkisista hankinnoista 1 §; L julkisista hankinnoista 7 §: The selection of a supplier based on total economic advantage is permissible provided the evaluation adheres to principles of equal and non-discriminatory treatment.

Keywords

AI generated
public procurement total economic advantage equal treatment non-discriminatory treatment contract award tender evaluation administrative review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
L julkisista hankinnoista 1 §
L julkisista hankinnoista 1 §
L julkisista hankinnoista 7 §
L julkisista hankinnoista 7 §
L julkisista hankinnoista 9 §
L julkisista hankinnoista 9 §
AI generated
market_2010_350
Market Court dismisses bid protest where excessive pilot experience requirement was deemed reasonable for helicopter deer tagging.
market_2012_58
Market Court dismisses procurement complaints due to untimely filing caused by defective notification procedures.
market_2004_76
Market Court voids public procurement contract award due to non-comparable tender submissions and procedural errors.
market_2018_577
Market Court dismissed bid protest; procurement authority within discretion to reject low bids without cost verification.
market_2010_463
Market Court dismisses bid protest where procurement authority's scoring was found discriminatory but not decisive for the winner.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Ilmailulaitos oli järjestänyt tarjouskilpailun, joka koski siviilihelikopteripäivystystä lentopelastuspalvelua varten Jyväskylän lentoasemalla vuosille 1996-2000. Vertailtuaan saamiaan kahta tarjousta ilmailulaitos oli päättänyt jatkaa neuvotteluja yhtiön A kanssa. Yhtiö B, jonka kanssa ilmailulaitos ei ollut päättänyt enää jatkaa neuvotteluja, saattoi asian kilpailuneuvoston ratkaistavaksi.

Kun hankinnassa tarjoaja oli valittu lain 7 §:ssä sallitulla tavalla vertailemalla tarjousten kokonaistaloudellista edullisuutta, tasapuolisen ja syrjimättömän kohtelun vaatimus asetti rajat sille, mitä seikkoja vertailussa oli voitu ottaa huomioon ja millä tavoin eri seikkoja oli voitu arvioinnissa painottaa.

L julkisista hankinnoista 1 §

L julkisista hankinnoista 7 §

L julkisista hankinnoista 9 §