Legislator Case Law & Legislation
0139/25.0BECTB.SA1 AI generated

Administrative court dismisses preliminary review of public tender documents when abstract legal issue is already settled by precedent.

Case Number 0139/25.0BECTB.SA1
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant's request for a preliminary review regarding the exclusion of a tender proposal based on a specific document. The applicant argued that the document required scrutiny to determine if it mandated the proposal's exclusion, while the respondent maintained the matter was already resolved by established case law. The court ruled that since the abstract legal question was already uniformly settled by its own jurisprudence, a new review of the specific document was unnecessary and the concrete decision did not contradict existing precedent.

Legislator headnote

Official

APRECIAÇÃO PRELIMINAR CONTRATAÇÃO PÚBLICA DOCUMENTO

Keywords

AI generated
preliminary review public tender document scrutiny jurisprudential uniformity administrative procedure exclusion of proposal supreme court precedent

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 223.º, n.º 1, do Código de Processo Administrativo

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

[Nº CONVENCIONAL] JSTA000P34789

[Nº DO DOCUMENTO] SA1202512170139/25

[RECORRENTE] A..., UNIPESSOAL, LDA.

[RECORRIDO 1] PRESIDÊNCIA DA REPÚBLICA E B..., LDA.

[URL] https://www.dgsi.pt/jsta.nsf/35fbbbf22e1bb1e680256f8e003ea931/F1F1F5FF0B95CA8380258D63003ECDFD?OpenDocument

SUMÁRIO

Não é de admitir a revista para verificar se um documento facultativo deve ou não determinar a exclusão de uma proposta quando a questão em abstracto já se encontra devidamente uniformizada pela jurisprudência deste Supremo Tribunal Administrativo e a decisão do caso concreto não se revela contrária a essa jurisprudência.