730.500
CIAPIVöBCIMP
CH-TI
CH-TI
Art. 6 CIAP Concordato intercantonale sugli appalti pubblici (CIAP)
CIAP
Art. 6 CIAP
1 Nel settore dei trattati internazionali, il presente Concordato è applicabile alle commesse definite nei trattati internazionali, in particolare
a) commesse edili in merito all’esecuzione di opere di edilizia o di genio civile;
b) commesse di forniture in merito all’acquisto di beni mobili, segnatamente mediante compravendita, leasing, locazione, affitto o nolo-vendita;
c) commesse di prestazioni di servizio.
2 Nel settore non contemplato dai trattati internazionali, il presente Concordato è applicabile a tutti i tipi di commesse pubbliche.
Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (38)
52.2008.399 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Administrative Appeal on Childcare Facility Award Dismissed for Inadmissibility
Cited in the considerations preamble.
52.2006.129 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Bid Exclusion Appeals in Public Tender for Construction Management Services
Cited in the final enumeration of applicable legal provisions.
52.2006.65 · ti (art. 4, 6, 7, 8, 15 CIAP)
Consortium v. State (Road Link Tender Transition)
These provisions of the Intercantonal Concordat on Public Procurement (CIAP) were cited in the preamble to the judgment, which precedes the dispositive orders, in connection with the ground for declaring the appeal inadmissible (lack of jurisdiction over a contractual matter).
52.2002.244 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Consortium Appeal of Highway Maintenance Contract Award Based on Bid Non-Conformity
Cited among the provisions considered when making the final orders regarding the acceptance of the appeals.
52.2002.78 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Appeal Against Award of Heavy Traffic Control Contract Following Allegedly Predatory Bid
Cited in the final considerations as a basis for the decision regarding the scope of the CIAP concerning service contracts.
52.2001.415 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Bidders v. Government Contract Award Procedure Defects
Cited as a basis for the overall decision framework, related to public procurement principles.
52.2001.389 · ti (Art. 6 CIAP)
Engineering Firms v. Municipality on Disqualification from Public Works Tender
Cited in the final section as a legal basis considered for the decision.
52.2001.260 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Consortia Appeals: Motorway Contract Award Over Overhead Charge Deviation
Cited in the final section listing the provisions applied, underpinning the obligation for the contract award decision to comply with competition rules.
52.2001.276 · ti (art. 6, 7, 12, 15 CIAP)
Challenge to Restricted Bidding Process and Contract Evaluation Upheld
These articles relate to the substantive and procedural basis for the decision on the appeal concerning the selection procedure, as the appeal was rejected based on findings related to these laws.
52.2001.180 · ti (Art. 6 CIAP)
Waste Disposal Consortium Resolution Challenge and Contract Award Standing
Cited in the preamble to the decision, relevant to the nature of the procurement discussed, although the decision was rejected on standing.
52.2001.175 · ti (art. 6, 7, 8 CIAP)
Contractor Bid Exclusion for Non-Conforming Material Specification in Public Works
These articles relate to the conditions and rules governing the award procedure, which justify the rejection of the appeal based on a non-compliant offer.
52.2001.87 · ti (art. 6, 7, 15 CIAP)
Territorial Department Waste Incineration Plant Tender Annulled for Lack of Authority
Cited in the preamble to the decision, relating to public procurement procedures which formed the basis of the contestation.
52.2001.66 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Consortium Exclusion Over Procurement Threshold
Cited in the grounds for the final decision, relating to the scope of the Intercantonal Agreement on Public Procurement.
52.2001.8 · ti (art. 6 CIAP)
Engineers' Consortium Barred from Challenging Flawed Tender Procedure After Participation
Cited among the provisions used to justify the decision.
52.2001.8 · ti (art. 6 cpv. 1 lett. c CIAP)
Engineers' Consortium Barred from Challenging Flawed Tender Procedure After Participation
Used to classify the object of the decision as a service provision.