{"id":8496,"date":"2017-08-31T17:01:00","date_gmt":"2017-08-31T15:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=8496"},"modified":"2017-09-01T14:19:27","modified_gmt":"2017-09-01T12:19:27","slug":"juridiska-puse-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=8496","title":{"rendered":"Juridisk\u0101 puse"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Turpin\u0101jums, s\u0101k. skat. \u201cIepirkumi\u201d 2017. g. j\u016bnija numur\u0101 <\/p>\n<p><strong><font size=\"3\" color=\"#2d5986\">Iesniegto dokumentu izskaidro\u0161anas robe\u017eas <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Sabiedrisko pakalpojumu sniedz\u0113ju iepirkumu likuma 47. panta ceturt\u0101 da\u013ca paredz pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja ties\u012bbas, nevis pien\u0101kumu piepras\u012bt, lai pretendents izskaidro pied\u0101v\u0101jumu. Otrk\u0101rt, norma attiecas uz t\u0101diem gad\u012bjumiem, kad pied\u0101v\u0101jums (ar to saprotot visu pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam iesniegto dokumentu paketi) nav gana prec\u012bzs, lai var\u0113tu p\u0101rbaud\u012bt atbilst\u012bbu nolikuma pras\u012bb\u0101m. \u0160aj\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 tiesa secin\u0101ja, ka pieteic\u0113jas pied\u0101v\u0101jumam pievienotais iek\u0101rtas buklets satur\u0113ja prec\u012bzas zi\u0146as tie\u0161i par pieteic\u0113jas pied\u0101v\u0101to tehniku, l\u012bdz ar to iepirkuma komisijai nebija nek\u0101, kas b\u016btu j\u0101preciz\u0113, prasot pieteic\u0113jai skaidrojumu. Tas, ka pied\u0101v\u0101jum\u0101 nor\u0101d\u012btais visp\u0101r\u012bgais apstiprin\u0101jums tehnikas atbilst\u012bbai nolikumam nesaskan ar buklet\u0101 ra\u017eot\u0101ja prec\u012bzi nor\u0101d\u012btajiem tehniskajiem parametriem, pats par sevi nenoz\u012bm\u0113, ka pied\u0101v\u0101jums ir neskaidrs, bet gan var nor\u0101d\u012bt uz pied\u0101v\u0101t\u0101s preces neatbilst\u012bbu pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja pras\u012bb\u0101m. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 15. novembra r\u012bc\u012bbas s\u0113des l\u0113mums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011539\/2016 <\/p>\n<p>Lai secin\u0101tu, ka v\u0113l\u0101k iesniegt\u0101 instrukcija (instrukcijas preciz\u0113jumi, papildin\u0101jumi) ir pied\u0101v\u0101juma papildin\u0101jumi vai groz\u012bjumi, t\u0101 b\u016btu j\u0101sal\u012bdzina ar s\u0101kotn\u0113jo pied\u0101v\u0101jumu, p\u0101rbaudot, vai v\u0113l\u0101k iesniegtie dokumenti izmaina pied\u0101v\u0101jumu p\u0113c b\u016bt\u012bbas. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 10. novembra spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011714\/2016 <\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<!--more--><br \/>\n<strong><font size=\"3\" color=\"#2d5986\">Konkursa nolikuma iztulko\u0161ana <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Konkursa nolikuma pras\u012bbas ir iztulkojamas t\u0101, lai t\u0101s piln\u012bgi ieg\u016btu savu praktisko iedarb\u012bbu. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 22. febru\u0101ra spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011292\/2016 <\/p>\n<p><strong><font size=\"3\" color=\"#2d5986\">Konkursa pras\u012bbu noteikt\u012bba <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jo liel\u0101ks svars ir k\u0101dam krit\u0113rijam, jo skaidr\u0101k defin\u0113tam tam j\u0101b\u016bt. Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja v\u0113l\u0113j\u0101s ieg\u0101d\u0101ties paaugstin\u0101ta servisa p\u0101rvad\u0101jumu pakalpojumu, un viens no \u0161\u0101da pakalpojuma nodro\u0161in\u0101\u0161anas b\u016btiskajiem faktoriem, \u0146emot v\u0113r\u0101 nolikum\u0101 noteikto, ir tie\u0161i transportl\u012bdzek\u013cu tehniskais papildu apr\u012bkojums. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c b\u016btu sagaid\u0101ms, ka pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja skaidri defin\u0113tu, kas ar to tiek saprasts. Vai nu tehniskaj\u0101s specifik\u0101cij\u0101s, vai ar\u012b \u2013 ja to paredz\u0113ts v\u0113rt\u0113t k\u0101 vienu no pie\u0161\u0137ir\u0161anas krit\u0113rijiem \u2013 pie attiec\u012bg\u0101 krit\u0113rija izv\u0113rt\u0113\u0161anas noteikumiem. Pret\u0113j\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 nav saprotams, kas tiek gaid\u012bts no pretendentiem un k\u0101 tas tiks nov\u0113rt\u0113ts. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 22. febru\u0101ra spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011365\/2016<\/p>\n<p>Nolikuma punkts, ka visi jaut\u0101jumi, kas nav atrun\u0101ti nolikum\u0101, tiek risin\u0101ti saska\u0146\u0101 ar Publisko iepirkumu likuma norm\u0101m, ir p\u0101r\u0101k visp\u0101r\u012bgs un no t\u0101 nevar secin\u0101t, ka tiek pras\u012bts apliecin\u0101t pieredzi noteikt\u0101 laika period\u0101. \u0160\u0101da normas piem\u0113ro\u0161ana b\u016btu pretrun\u0101 ar p\u0101rskat\u0101m\u012bbas principu. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2017. gada 10.febru\u0101ra r\u012bc\u012bbas s\u0113des l\u0113mums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011456\/2017 Pied\u0101v\u0101jums str\u012bdus krit\u0113rij\u0101 tiek nov\u0113rt\u0113ts atkar\u012bb\u0101 no pied\u0101v\u0101to izmaksu lieluma \u2013 jo zem\u0101kas apkalpo\u0161anas izmaksas, jo vair\u0101k punktu pretendents var sa\u0146emt. T\u0101d\u0113j\u0101di pied\u0101v\u0101jumu objekt\u012bvas sal\u012bdzin\u0101\u0161anas nol\u016bk\u0101 ir svar\u012bgi, lai katrs pretendents \u0161aj\u0101 poz\u012bcij\u0101 uzr\u0101d\u012btu visas faktisk\u0101s izmaksas, kas t\u0101 vai cit\u0101di izce\u013cas no nepiecie\u0161am\u012bbas apkalpot t\u0101 pied\u0101v\u0101t\u0101s iek\u0101rtas. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 22.febru\u0101ra spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011138\/2016<\/p>\n<p><strong><font size=\"3\" color=\"#2d5986\">Atbilst\u012bbas pras\u012bb\u0101m ekspert\u012bze <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Nav pamata uzskat\u012bt, ka alkometra ekspert\u012bzi iepirkum\u0101 var\u0113ja veikt tikai verific\u0113\u0161anas un metrolo\u0123isk\u0101s kontroles jom\u0101 specializ\u0113jusies persona. B\u016btiski ir tas, vai pieaicin\u0101t\u0101 persona k\u0101 lietprat\u0113ja var\u0113ja sniegt zi\u0146as par preci, kas iepirkuma komisijai \u013cauj objekt\u012bvi izv\u0113rt\u0113t preces atbilst\u012bbu t\u0101s vajadz\u012bb\u0101m, kas formul\u0113tas nolikum\u0101 pras\u012bbu veid\u0101. Lai p\u0101rbaud\u012btu secin\u0101juma pareiz\u012bbu par preces faktisko neatbilst\u012bbu, var tikt noz\u012bm\u0113ta neatkar\u012bga ekspert\u012bze, ta\u010du \u0161aj\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 pieteic\u0113ja neiesniedza ties\u0101 pre\u010du paraugu \u0161\u0101das ekspert\u012bzes veik\u0161anai. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 10. novembra spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011424\/2016 <\/p>\n<p><strong><font size=\"3\" color=\"#2d5986\">Pieredzes kop\u012bgo\u0161ana <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Citu koncern\u0101 ietilpsto\u0161o uz\u0146\u0113mumu pieredze nav uzskat\u0101ma par pieteic\u0113ju pieredzi, lai ar\u012b t\u0101s ietilpst taj\u0101 pa\u0161\u0101 koncern\u0101. Vair\u0101ku uz\u0146\u0113mumu centraliz\u0113ta vad\u012bba vai pe\u013c\u0146as nodo\u0161ana nerada pamatu uzskat\u012bt, ka visu koncerna uz\u0146\u0113mumu materi\u0101lie un nemateri\u0101lie resursi t\u0101d\u0113\u013c ir kop\u012bgi un vis\u0101m koncerna sabiedr\u012bb\u0101m autom\u0101tiski un br\u012bvi pieejami jebkur\u0101 br\u012bd\u012b jebk\u0101d\u0101 apjom\u0101. Pieredze ir praktiskaj\u0101 darb\u012bb\u0101 ieg\u016btais zin\u0101\u0161anu, prasmju un iema\u0146u kopums. T\u0101tad pieredze ir nemateri\u0101ls personiska rakstura resurss, kas piem\u012bt konkr\u0113tajai personai, kura pati veikusi praktisko darb\u012bbu. T\u0101d\u0113j\u0101di princip\u0101 nevar uzskat\u012bt, ka vienas personas pieredze autom\u0101tiski var\u0113tu k\u013c\u016bt par citas personas pieredzi. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 21. j\u016bnija spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011189\/2016 <\/p>\n<p><strong><font size=\"3\" color=\"#2d5986\">Nodok\u013cu par\u0101du nees\u012bbas apliecin\u0101\u0161ana <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Publisko iepirkumu likuma 39.1 panta astot\u0101s da\u013cas 2. punkts noteic, ka apliecin\u0101jums Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienesta administr\u0113to nodok\u013cu par\u0101da nees\u012bbai ir attiec\u012bgo faktu apliecino\u0161a izdruka no sist\u0113mas (attiec\u012bgi \u2013 apliecin\u0101jums pa\u0161vald\u012bbas administr\u0113to nodok\u013cu par\u0101du nees\u012bbai ir pa\u0161vald\u012bbas izzi\u0146a). Pieteic\u0113jas iesniegtie maks\u0101jumu uzdevumi nav atz\u012bstami par nodok\u013cu par\u0101da nees\u012bbas pier\u0101d\u012bjumiem Publisko iepirkumu likuma 39.1 panta astot\u0101s da\u013cas 2. punkta izpratn\u0113, jo norma prasa, lai pretendents iesniegtu tie\u0161i \u0161\u0101du kompetent\u0101s nodok\u013cu administr\u0101cijas iest\u0101des apliecin\u0101jumu nodok\u013cu par\u0101da nees\u012bbas faktam, nevis jebk\u0101du pretendenta br\u012bvi izv\u0113l\u0113tu pier\u0101d\u012b\u0161anas l\u012bdzekli. <\/p>\n<p>Likuma \u201cPar nodok\u013ciem un nodev\u0101m\u201d 23.1 panta otr\u0101 da\u013ca noteic, ka nodok\u013ca samaksas diena ir diena, kad valsts vai pa\u0161vald\u012bbas bud\u017eets ir sa\u0146\u0113mis tam piekrit\u012bgo nodok\u013ca maks\u0101jumu. Attiec\u012bgi Ministru kabineta 2010. gada 12. oktobra noteikumu Nr. 972 \u201cNoteikumi par k\u0101rt\u012bbu, k\u0101 veicami maks\u0101jumi valsts bud\u017eet\u0101 un tie atz\u012bstami par sa\u0146emtiem, un pras\u012bb\u0101m tie\u0161saistes maks\u0101jumu pakalpojumu izmanto\u0161anai nor\u0113\u0137inos ar valsts bud\u017eetu\u201d 5.2. apak\u0161punkts paredz, ka veiktais maks\u0101jums ir atz\u012bstams par sa\u0146emtu valsts bud\u017eet\u0101, ja Valsts kase no maks\u0101t\u0101ja maks\u0101jumu pakalpojumu sniedz\u0113ja sa\u0146emto maks\u0101juma summu ir dar\u012bjusi pieejamu valsts bud\u017eeta kont\u0101 Valsts kas\u0113 p\u0113c tam, kad maks\u0101t\u0101ja maks\u0101jumu pakalpojumu sniedz\u0113js, pamatojoties uz maks\u0101t\u0101ja doto maks\u0101juma r\u012bkojumu, ir izpild\u012bjis maks\u0101jumu un veicis naudas p\u0101rvedumu. T\u0101tad maks\u0101juma izdevuma iesnieg\u0161ana bank\u0101 v\u0113l nenoz\u012bm\u0113, ka nodoklis ir uzskat\u0101ms par samaks\u0101tu. Nodoklis atz\u012bstams par samaks\u0101tu tikai tad, kad maks\u0101juma apstr\u0101des rezult\u0101t\u0101 valsts bud\u017eets ir sa\u0146\u0113mis attiec\u012bgo nodok\u013ca summu valsts bud\u017eeta kont\u0101 Valsts kas\u0113. T\u0101 ne vienm\u0113r b\u016bs t\u0101 pati diena, kad maks\u0101juma uzdevums iesniegts bank\u0101. T\u0101p\u0113c 2015. gada 24. j\u016blija maks\u0101juma uzdevumi nav pier\u0101d\u012bjums tam, ka pieteic\u0113jai 2015. gada 24. j\u016blij\u0101 nav nodok\u013cu par\u0101du. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 4. augusta r\u012bc\u012bbas s\u0113des l\u0113mums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u20111215\/2016 Likumdev\u0113js Publisko iepirkumu likuma 39.1 panta sest\u0101s da\u013cas 2. punkt\u0101 skaidri noteicis formu, k\u0101dai j\u0101atbilst Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienesta l\u0113mumam par nodok\u013cu samaksas termi\u0146a pagarin\u0101\u0161anu vai atlik\u0161anu vai vieno\u0161an\u0101s ar dienestu par nodok\u013cu par\u0101da nomaksu, lai t\u0101 var\u0113tu tikt atz\u012bta par nodok\u013ca par\u0101da nees\u012bbas pier\u0101d\u012bjumu iepirkuma proced\u016br\u0101. Tostarp likumdev\u0113js tie\u0161i paredz\u0113jis, ka l\u0113mumam par nodok\u013cu samaksas termi\u0146a pagarin\u0101jumu j\u0101b\u016bt pie\u0146emtam pirms pied\u0101v\u0101juma iesnieg\u0161anas p\u0113d\u0113j\u0101s dienas. Publisko iepirkumu likuma normas paredz pretendenta pien\u0101kumu nok\u0101rtot nodok\u013cu saist\u012bbas l\u012bdz pied\u0101v\u0101juma iesnieg\u0161anai, savuk\u0101rt p\u0113c tam \u2013 pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja noteiktaj\u0101 10 dienu laik\u0101 \u2013 iesniegt vien\u012bgi apliecin\u0101jumu par \u0161\u012b pien\u0101kuma izpildi. L\u0113mums par nodok\u013cu samaksas termi\u0146a pagarin\u0101jumu, kas pie\u0146emts p\u0113c pied\u0101v\u0101juma iesnieg\u0161anas termi\u0146a beig\u0101m, ir pied\u0101v\u0101juma tr\u016bkuma nov\u0113r\u0161ana. \u0160\u0101d\u0101 veid\u0101 veikta pretendenta atbilst\u012bbas nodro\u0161in\u0101\u0161ana jau p\u0113c pied\u0101v\u0101juma iesnieg\u0161anas termi\u0146a beig\u0101m nav sader\u012bga ar publisko iepirkumu proced\u016br\u0101s piem\u0113rojamo vienl\u012bdz\u012bbas principu, jo pie\u013cautu nepamatoti at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgus pras\u012bbu izpildes termi\u0146us viena iepirkuma pretendentiem. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2017. gada 3. febru\u0101ra l\u0113mums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011724\/2017 <\/p>\n<p><strong><font size=\"3\" color=\"#2d5986\">Iepirkuma p\u0101rtrauk\u0161ana <\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Publisko iepirkumu likuma 38. panta otr\u0101s da\u013cas otrais teikums \u013cauj pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam p\u0101rtraukt iepirkuma proced\u016bru, ja tam ir objekt\u012bvs pamatojums. L\u0113muma tiesiskuma v\u0113rt\u0113jums var ietvert l\u0113muma pamatojuma patiesuma p\u0101rbaudi, jo \u012bpa\u0161i tad, ja past\u0101v apst\u0101k\u013ci, kas var nor\u0101d\u012bt uz iepirkumu principiem neatbilsto\u0161u r\u012bc\u012bbu. Konkr\u0113taj\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 iepirkums p\u0101rtraukts p\u0113c pied\u0101v\u0101jumu atv\u0113r\u0161anas, t\u016bda\u013c izsludinot jaunu iepirkumu par tiem pa\u0161iem pakalpojumiem ar atsevi\u0161\u0137\u0101m izmain\u012bt\u0101m pras\u012bb\u0101m, kur\u0101m atbilst vairs tikai viens no s\u0101kotn\u0113jiem pretendentiem. Tas tiesai liek r\u016bp\u012bgi piev\u0113rsties pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja sniegt\u0101 pamatojuma izv\u0113rt\u0113\u0161anai. Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja pamatoja, ka bijusi nepiecie\u0161am\u012bba groz\u012bt nolikuma pras\u012bbas. Tiesas sniegtais v\u0113rt\u0113jums attiecas uz to, vai patie\u0161\u0101m bija \u0161\u0101da nepiecie\u0161am\u012bba, vai ar\u012b atsauce uz to izmantota vien\u012bgi k\u0101 aizsegs citu m\u0113r\u0137u \u012bsteno\u0161anai. <\/p>\n<p>AT ALD 2016. gada 23. septembra r\u012bc\u012bbas s\u0113des l\u0113mums liet\u0101 Nr. SKA\u2011366\/2016 <\/p>\n<p><b> J\u0101nis Neimanis, Dr. iur., Augst\u0101k\u0101s tiesas Administrat\u012bvo lietu departamenta tiesnesis, Latvijas Universit\u0101tes Juridisk\u0101s fakult\u0101tes asoci\u0113tais profesors<br \/>\n<\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Noz\u012bm\u012bg\u0101k\u0101s Augst\u0101k\u0101s tiesas Administrat\u012bvo lietu departamenta atzi\u0146as publisko iepirkumu ties\u012bbu piem\u0113ro\u0161anas jom\u0101 2016.\u00a0\u2013 2017. gad\u0101.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8496"}],"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=8496"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8496\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8528,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8496\/revisions\/8528"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8496"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8496"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8496"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}