{"id":11643,"date":"2019-09-11T11:52:02","date_gmt":"2019-09-11T09:52:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=11643"},"modified":"2019-09-11T12:08:32","modified_gmt":"2019-09-11T10:08:32","slug":"dazas-tiesu-prakses-atzinas-v","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=11643","title":{"rendered":"Da\u017eas tiesu prakses atzi\u0146as (V)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Rakst\u0101 turpin\u0101m apskat\u012bt ar publisko iepirkumu jomu saist\u012bt\u0101s Latvijas Republikas Augst\u0101k\u0101s Tiesas atzi\u0146as, nu jau piev\u0113r\u0161oties 2019. gada pirm\u0101s puses publiski pieejamajiem nol\u0113mumiem1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Izloze iepirkuma l\u012bguma sl\u0113dz\u0113ja izv\u0113lei:<\/b> pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js nolikum\u0101 bija paredz\u0113jis izlozi k\u0101 veidu konkursa uzvar\u0113t\u0101ja noteik\u0161anai, bet nebija detaliz\u0113jis, k\u0101d\u0101 veid\u0101 izloze tiks veikta. Pretendents iebilda pret izlozes norisi, jo pretendenti taj\u0101 nebija aicin\u0101ti piedal\u012bties, t.i., izloze nebija publiska. Sen\u0101ts nor\u0101da, ka izloze ir pie\u013caujams instruments, lai noteiktu, ar kuru pretendentu nosl\u0113dzams iepirkuma l\u012bgums, ja ir iesniegti vair\u0101k nek\u0101 viens vien\u0101di nov\u0113rt\u0113jams atbilsto\u0161s pied\u0101v\u0101jums. Izloze ir tradicion\u0101ls god\u012bgs izv\u0113les veids, \u013caujot nejau\u0161\u012bbai iz\u0161\u0137irt, piem\u0113ram, kuram no diviem vai vair\u0101kiem vien\u0101diem pied\u0101v\u0101jumiem dot priek\u0161roku. Vienlaikus ir j\u0101apzin\u0101s riski, ko \u0161\u0101ds izv\u0113les veids var rad\u012bt. Tas \u012bpa\u0161i lielu noz\u012bmi pie\u0161\u0137ir izlozes norisei un t\u0101s dokument\u0113\u0161anai. Izlozes objektivit\u0101ti un piln\u012bgu nejau\u0161\u012bbas principa iev\u0113ro\u0161anu, k\u0101 ar\u012b \u0161aubu nov\u0113r\u0161anu no pretendentu puses b\u016bt\u012bb\u0101 var nodro\u0161in\u0101t tikai izloz\u0113 ieinteres\u0113to pretendentu kl\u0101tb\u016btne pa\u0161\u0101 izloz\u0113, kad tiem pa\u0161iem ir iesp\u0113ja par to p\u0101rliecin\u0101ties. Izlozes ticam\u012bbu liel\u0101 m\u0113r\u0101 var nodro\u0161in\u0101t ar\u012b proces\u0101 neieinteres\u0113tu personu kl\u0101tb\u016btne, kuras tad var apliecin\u0101t nejau\u0161\u012bbas principa iev\u0113ro\u0161anu. <\/b>(15.05.2019. SKA-742\/2019<\/b>)
\n
\nPagaidu aizsardz\u012bba: <\/b>attiec\u012bb\u0101 uz situ\u0101ciju, kad dien\u0101, kad pirm\u0101s instances ties\u0101 tika sa\u0146emta pieteic\u0113jas blakus s\u016bdz\u012bba, ar\u012b p\u0101rs\u016bdz\u0113tais Iepirkumu uzraudz\u012bbas biroja l\u0113mums zaud\u0113ja sp\u0113ku (tika nosl\u0113gta visp\u0101r\u012bg\u0101 vieno\u0161an\u0101s), Sen\u0101ts nor\u0101da, ka t\u0101 judikat\u016br\u0101 konstanti atz\u012bts: ja iepirkuma proced\u016bras rezult\u0101t\u0101 ir nosl\u0113gts iepirkuma l\u012bgums, iepirkuma proced\u016bras ietvaros pie\u0146emtie p\u0101rs\u016bdz\u0113tie l\u0113mumi zaud\u0113 savu sp\u0113ku un tiesas ce\u013c\u0101 iesp\u0113jama tikai to tiesiskuma p\u0101rbaude. <\/b>Attiec\u012bgi ar\u012b pagaidu aizsardz\u012bbas l\u012bdzekli \u2013 p\u0101rs\u016bdz\u0113t\u0101 l\u0113muma darb\u012bbas aptur\u0113\u0161ana \u2013 \u0161\u0101d\u0101 situ\u0101cij\u0101 vairs nav iesp\u0113jams piem\u0113rot, jo darb\u012bbu var aptur\u0113t tikai t\u0101dam administrat\u012bvajam aktam, kas joproj\u0101m rada akt\u012bvas tiesisk\u0101s sekas. (14.01.2019. SKA-959\/2019<\/b>)<\/p>\n

L\u012bguma groz\u012bjumi:<\/b> izskatot str\u012bdu par l\u012bguma groz\u012bjumu b\u016btiskumu, Sen\u0101ta Administrat\u012bvo lietu departaments piekrita zem\u0101k\u0101s instances ties\u0101m, ka veiktie groz\u012bjumi (dubultots avansa apjoms, sa\u012bsin\u0101ts starpmaks\u0101jumu veik\u0161anas periods, palielin\u0101ts materi\u0101lu kl\u0101sts, par kuriem samaksa tiek veikta uzreiz p\u0113c pieg\u0101des, nevis tikai p\u0113c tam, kad materi\u0101li jau ieb\u016bv\u0113ti) ir uzskat\u0101mi par b\u016btiskiem un \u0161\u0101du groz\u012bjumu gad\u012bjum\u0101 ir pamatoti piem\u0113rota finan\u0161u korekcija. (10.03.2019. SKA-38\/2019<\/b>) Savuk\u0101rt, izv\u0113rt\u0113jot b\u016btisku darbu nomai\u0146u ar citiem darbiem saist\u012bb\u0101 ar Publisko iepirkumu likuma (PIL) 67.1 panta otr\u0101s da\u013cas 1. punkta normu (aut. \u2013 PIL redakcija, kas bija sp\u0113k\u0101 l\u012bdz 01.03.2017., \u0161obr\u012bd PIL 61. panta tre\u0161\u0101s da\u013cas 1. punkts) Sen\u0101ts nor\u0101d\u012bjis, ka t\u0101 interpret\u0113jama t\u0101d\u0113j\u0101di, ka b\u016btisku groz\u012bjumu izdar\u012b\u0161ana iepirkuma l\u012bgum\u0101 p\u0113c l\u012bguma nosl\u0113g\u0161anas ir pie\u013caujama tad, ja iepirkuma dokumentos \u0161\u0101da iesp\u0113ja ir bijusi paredz\u0113ta skaidri un nep\u0101rprotami, nodro\u0161inot, ka visi saimniecisk\u0101s darb\u012bbas subjekti, kas ieinteres\u0113ti piedal\u012bties min\u0113taj\u0101 l\u012bgum\u0101, iepaz\u012bstoties ar iepirkuma dokument\u0101ciju, apzin\u0101s b\u016btisku groz\u012bjumu veik\u0161anas iesp\u0113ju. Konkr\u0113taj\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 Sen\u0101ts atzinis, ka pirm\u0101s instances tiesas spriedum\u0101 ietvertais pamatojums nav pietiekams, lai pamatotu secin\u0101jumu, ka iepirkuma dokumentos bija skaidri un nep\u0101rprotami nor\u0101d\u012bts, ka konkr\u0113tajos apst\u0101k\u013cos pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js s\u0101kotn\u0113j\u0101 l\u012bgum\u0101 dr\u012bkst izdar\u012bt konkr\u0113t\u0101 veida groz\u012bjumus. P\u0101rliecinoties par groz\u012bjumu atbilst\u012bbu, vispirms j\u0101nov\u0113rt\u0113, cik konkr\u0113ti vai visp\u0101r\u012bgi iepirkuma dokumentos atrun\u0101ta l\u012bguma b\u016btiskas groz\u012b\u0161anas iesp\u0113ja. Ja iepirkuma dokumentos \u0161\u0101da iesp\u0113ja noformul\u0113ta visp\u0101r\u012bgi, nav pietiekami atsaukties tikai uz \u0161\u0101das atrunas tekstu, bet, p\u0101rbaudot iepirkuma dokument\u0101ciju kopum\u0101 un kopsakar\u0101 ar lietas faktiskajiem apst\u0101k\u013ciem, j\u0101nov\u0113rt\u0113, vai konkr\u0113tajos apst\u0101k\u013cos ir uzskat\u0101ms, ka visiem potenci\u0101lajiem pretendentiem, iepaz\u012bstoties ar nolikuma dokument\u0101ciju, b\u016btu vajadz\u0113jis saprast, ka l\u012bguma izpildes ietvaros pie noteiktiem nosac\u012bjumiem past\u0101v iesp\u0113ja izdar\u012bt t\u0101dus groz\u012bjumus iepirkuma l\u012bgum\u0101, par kuriem ir str\u012bds konkr\u0113taj\u0101 liet\u0101.<\/b> (20.06.2019. SKA-869\/2019)<\/b><\/p>\n

L\u012bguma izpilde:<\/b> k\u0101d\u0101 str\u012bd\u0101 izv\u0113l\u0113tais pretendents inform\u0113ja pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ju, ka tas savas saist\u012bbas nodod citam uz\u0146\u0113mumam. Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js pakalpojumus turpin\u0101ja sa\u0146emt, tom\u0113r notika sarakste par p\u0101rjaunojuma l\u012bguma nosl\u0113g\u0161anu, kurai pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js nepiekrita un apmaks\u0101t saist\u012bbu p\u0101r\u0146\u0113m\u0113ja r\u0113\u0137inus atteic\u0101s. Sen\u0101ta Civillietu departaments nor\u0101d\u012bjis, ka liet\u0101 nav str\u012bda, ka atbild\u0113t\u0101jas (pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js) pas\u016bt\u012bja un sa\u0146\u0113ma sniegtos pakalpojumus, bet samaksu nav veiku\u0161as. Konkr\u0113tie uz\u0146\u0113muma l\u012bgumi ir publisko iepirkumu l\u012bgumi, bet tas nevar ietekm\u0113t priv\u0101ttiesiska str\u012bda iz\u0161\u0137ir\u0161anu. L\u012bguma turpin\u0101\u0161ana vai atk\u0101p\u0161an\u0101s no t\u0101 bija atbild\u0113t\u0101ju izv\u0113le un atbild\u012bba, t\u0101d\u0113\u013c publisko ties\u012bbu noteikumu neiev\u0113ro\u0161ana nedod ties\u012bbas vienai pusei iedz\u012bvoties uz otras r\u0113\u0137ina. <\/b>(21.02.2019.SKC-174\/2019<\/b>). L\u012bdz ar to secin\u0101ms, ka pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam, ja tas nepiekr\u012bt \u0161\u0101dam p\u0101rjaunojuma l\u012bgumam, j\u0101r\u016bp\u0113jas ar\u012b par to, lai tas nesa\u0146emtu pakalpojumus, cit\u0101d\u0101k var tikt uzskat\u012bts, ka tas klus\u0113jot ir izteicis savu piekri\u0161anu turpm\u0101kai pu\u0161u sadarb\u012bbai un attiec\u012bgi samaksa b\u016bs veicama. Par l\u012bguma izpildi bija str\u012bds ar\u012b cit\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101, kur valsts sabiedr\u012bba ar ierobe\u017eotu atbild\u012bbu (VSIA) ar pras\u012bt\u0101ju nosl\u0113dza iepirkuma l\u012bgumu, kas tika izpild\u012bts, ta\u010du samaksa netika veikta un pras\u012bt\u0101ja nor\u0101d\u012bja, ka t\u0101 uz sava r\u0113\u0137ina veikusi valstij piedero\u0161a \u012bpa\u0161uma uzlabojumus, t\u0101d\u0113\u013c iesniedza pras\u012bbu pret Latvijas Republiku. Pras\u012bba tika noraid\u012bta pirmaj\u0101 instanc\u0113, ta\u010du apgabaltiesa pras\u012bbu apmierin\u0101ja. Tam piekrita ar\u012b Sen\u0101ta Civillietu departaments, uzsverot, ka jebkuras lietas izskat\u012b\u0161an\u0101s svar\u012bgs ir t\u0101s rezult\u0101ts \u2013 taisn\u012bgs spriedums un konkr\u0113taj\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 pras\u012bba pret valsti ir celta nevis k\u0101 pret attiec\u012bg\u0101s kapit\u0101lsabiedr\u012bbas dal\u012bbnieci, bet k\u0101 pret t\u0101da publiska objekta \u012bpa\u0161nieci, kuram pras\u012bt\u0101ja ir tais\u012bjusi nepiecie\u0161amos izdevumus un tie netika atl\u012bdzin\u0101ti. Min\u0113t\u0101 iemesls nebija VSIA sliktais finansi\u0101lais st\u0101voklis, bet gan fakts, ka valsts tie\u0161i taj\u0101 laik\u0101, kad kapit\u0101lsabiedr\u012bbai bija j\u0101veic samaksa par izpild\u012btajiem darbiem, izmantojot savu publisko varu, piln\u012bgi p\u0101rtrauca min\u0113t\u0101s kapit\u0101lsabiedr\u012bbas finans\u0113jumu, no kura sa\u0146em\u0161anas bija atkar\u012bga kapit\u0101lsabiedr\u012bbas sp\u0113ja nor\u0113\u0137in\u0101ties ar pras\u012bt\u0101ju, attiec\u012bgi kas\u0101cijas s\u016bdz\u012bbas argumenti nav pamats sprieduma atcel\u0161anai. (11.04.2019. SKC-31\/2019<\/b>)<\/p>\n

Konkurences ties\u012bbu p\u0101rk\u0101pumi:<\/b> iepirkumu joma ir cie\u0161i saist\u012bta ar\u012b ar konkurences ties\u012bb\u0101m, t\u0101d\u0113\u013c ir v\u0113rts nedaudz apskat\u012bt, k\u0101 tiek izv\u0113rt\u0113ti \u0161\u0101di p\u0101rk\u0101pumi. T\u0101, piem\u0113ram, Sen\u0101ta Administrat\u012bvo lietu departaments izskat\u012bjis lietu, kur\u0101 pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101jam Konkurences padome uzlikusi naudas sodu, jo pied\u0101v\u0101jumi konkursiem nav sast\u0101d\u012bti neatkar\u012bgi, t.i., tirgus dal\u012bbnieki savstarp\u0113ji apmain\u012bju\u0161ies ar inform\u0101ciju par to pied\u0101v\u0101jumiem iepirkumos, t.sk. t\u0101m\u0113m. Pret pieteic\u0113jas iebildumiem Sen\u0101ts nor\u0101d\u012bjis, ka judikat\u016br\u0101 atz\u012bts, ka, v\u0113rt\u0113jot tirgus dal\u012bbnieku r\u012bc\u012bbas atbilst\u012bbu neatkar\u012bgai r\u012bc\u012bbai, tiesai j\u0101iev\u0113ro, ka liel\u0101kaj\u0101 da\u013c\u0101 gad\u012bjumu pret konkurenci v\u0113rstu darb\u012bbu vai nol\u012bgumu past\u0101v\u0113\u0161ana ir j\u0101izsecina no da\u017e\u0101d\u0101m sakrit\u012bb\u0101m un nor\u0101d\u0113m, kuru daudzums izsl\u0113dz \u0161aubas par nejau\u0161\u012bbu no noteikta skaita sakrit\u012bbu un nor\u0101\u017eu. Iev\u0113rojot, ka vieno\u0161an\u0101s par saska\u0146otu r\u012bc\u012bbu konkurentu starp\u0101 tiek sod\u012bta ar smag\u0101m sek\u0101m, nav sagaid\u0101ms, ka konkur\u0113jo\u0161i tirgus dal\u012bbnieki atst\u0101s uzskat\u0101mus pier\u0101d\u012bjumus par to. Pamat\u0101 liel\u0101kaj\u0101 da\u013c\u0101 gad\u012bjumu pret konkurenci v\u0113rstu darb\u012bbu vai nol\u012bgumu past\u0101v\u0113\u0161ana ir p\u0101rbaud\u0101ma no netie\u0161iem pier\u0101d\u012bjumiem, kuri, skat\u012bti kop\u0101 vai nepast\u0101vot citam lo\u0123iskam izskaidrojumam, var veidot pier\u0101d\u012bjumu par konkurences normu p\u0101rk\u0101pumu. (26.04.2019. SKA-104\/2019<\/b>) T\u0101tad secin\u0101jumi par p\u0101rk\u0101pumu var tikt izdar\u012bti no lietas faktiem to kopsakar\u0101, pat tad, ja tie atsevi\u0161\u0137i tie\u0161i nenor\u0101da uz p\u0101rk\u0101pumu. Pla\u0161\u0101k konkr\u0113tie lietas apst\u0101k\u013ci aprakst\u012bti spriedum\u0101.<\/p>\n

Nol\u0113mumus iesp\u0113jams atrast https:\/\/manas.tiesas.lv\/eTiesasMvc\/nolemumi<\/a>, lauk\u0101 \u201eMekl\u0113\u0161anas tips\u201d nor\u0101dot \u201eMekl\u0113t fr\u0101zi loc\u012bjumos\u201d un lauk\u0101 \u201cMekl\u0113t nol\u0113muma tekst\u0101\u201d nor\u0101dot attiec\u012bgo numuru, k\u0101 ar\u012b attiec\u012bb\u0101 uz judikat\u016bru – AT m\u0101jaslap\u0101.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js nolikum\u0101 bija paredz\u0113jis izlozi k\u0101 veidu konkursa uzvar\u0113t\u0101ja noteik\u0161anai, bet nebija detaliz\u0113jis, k\u0101d\u0101 veid\u0101 izloze tiks veikta. Pretendents iebilda pret izlozes norisi, jo pretendenti taj\u0101 nebija aicin\u0101ti piedal\u012bties, t.i., izloze nebija publiska. Sen\u0101ts nor\u0101da, ka izloze ir pie\u013caujams instruments, lai noteiktu, ar kuru pretendentu nosl\u0113dzams iepirkuma l\u012bgums, ja ir iesniegti vair\u0101k nek\u0101 viens vien\u0101di nov\u0113rt\u0113jams atbilsto\u0161s pied\u0101v\u0101jums. Izloze ir tradicion\u0101ls god\u012bgs izv\u0113les veids, \u013caujot nejau\u0161\u012bbai iz\u0161\u0137irt, piem\u0113ram, kuram no diviem vai vair\u0101kiem vien\u0101diem pied\u0101v\u0101jumiem dot priek\u0161roku. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[174],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11643"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11643"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11643\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11692,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11643\/revisions\/11692"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11643"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11643"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11643"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}