{"id":9160,"date":"2018-02-01T14:01:20","date_gmt":"2018-02-01T12:01:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=9160"},"modified":"2018-02-02T15:27:06","modified_gmt":"2018-02-02T13:27:06","slug":"svaigakas-tiesu-prakses-atzinas-publisko-iepirkumu-lietas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=9160","title":{"rendered":"Svaig\u0101k\u0101s tiesu prakses atzi\u0146as publisko iepirkumu liet\u0101s"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u0160aj\u0101 rakst\u0101 sniegts \u012bss ieskats Latvijas Republikas Augst\u0101k\u0101s tiesas (AT) publiski pieejamo 2017. gada otr\u0101s puses nol\u0113mumos publisko iepirkumu liet\u0101s paustaj\u0101s atzi\u0146\u0101s, pla\u0161\u0101kai izpratnei aicinot iepaz\u012bties ar pa\u0161iem nol\u0113mumiem, k\u0101 ar\u012b AT prakses apkopojumu1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Kas ir pretendents? <\/b>AT nor\u0101da, ka pretendents ir pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101js, kas iesniedzis dokumentu, kura saturs ir objekt\u012bvi saprotams un attiecas uz konkr\u0113to iepirkuma proced\u016bru. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja konstat\u0113t\u0101s b\u016btisk\u0101s pied\u0101v\u0101juma neatbilst\u012bbas var\u0113tu b\u016bt pamats t\u0101 turpm\u0101kai nev\u0113rt\u0113\u0161anai, bet ne secin\u0101jumam, ka tas visp\u0101r nav iesniegts un t\u0101d\u0113\u013c pieteic\u0113js nav pretendents iepirkum\u0101, un nav j\u0101piem\u0113ro nogaid\u012b\u0161anas termi\u0146\u0161. (07.07.2017. SKA-228\/2017). Cit\u0101 kontekst\u0101 AT nor\u0101d\u012bjusi, ka pretendents ir persona, kura, iesniedzot pied\u0101v\u0101jumu, izteikusi gribu pretend\u0113t uz l\u012bguma sl\u0113g\u0161anas ties\u012bb\u0101m. Persona, kura pied\u0101v\u0101jumu atsauc vai nekad nav iesniegusi, uz t\u0101m nepretend\u0113 un nav (vairs) uzskat\u0101ma par pretendentu. T\u0101p\u0113c, izv\u0113rt\u0113jot Publisko iepirkumu likuma (PIL) 56.panta sept\u012bt\u0101s da\u013cas2<\/a><\/sup> piem\u0113ro\u0161anas pamatu, nav j\u0101apsver, vai persona, kura pied\u0101v\u0101jumu atsaukusi vai nekad nav iesniegusi, atbilst pras\u012bb\u0101m. Normas piem\u0113ro\u0161anas priek\u0161noteikums ir tas, ka konkr\u0113t\u0101 iepirkuma ietvaros pied\u0101v\u0101juma izv\u0113les br\u012bd\u012b nepast\u0101v re\u0101la konkurence. (12.10.2017. SKA-668\/2017).
\n
\nAt\u013cauta pras\u012bba?<\/b> Jebk\u0101du pras\u012bbu izvirz\u012b\u0161ana ierobe\u017eo konkurenci, ta\u010du aizliegti ir tikai nepamatoti, nevis jebkuri konkurences ierobe\u017eojumi. Pras\u012bbu sam\u0113r\u012bgums un objektivit\u0101te p\u0101rbaud\u0101ma noskaidrojot, vai pras\u012bba ir objekt\u012bvi piem\u0113rota pretendentu finansi\u0101lo un saimniecisko iesp\u0113ju noskaidro\u0161anai un sam\u0113rojama tie\u0161i ar konkr\u0113t\u0101 l\u012bguma priek\u0161metu, proti, nep\u0101rsniedz to, kas sapr\u0101t\u012bgi nepiecie\u0161ams m\u0113r\u0137a sasnieg\u0161anai. Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam nav j\u0101uz\u0146emas nesapr\u0101t\u012bgs l\u012bguma neizpildes risks, piel\u0101gojot apgroz\u012bjuma pras\u012bbas tirgum, tikai t\u0101d\u0113\u013c, ka lielai da\u013cai pakalpojumu sniedz\u0113ju ir zema finansi\u0101l\u0101 un saimniecisk\u0101 kapacit\u0101te, vai t\u0101d\u0113\u013c, ka iepriek\u0161 tas samierin\u0101jies ar zem\u0101kiem \u0161\u0101 st\u0101vok\u013ca r\u0101d\u012bt\u0101jiem pat ja rezult\u0101t\u0101 ieg\u0101de ir d\u0101rg\u0101ka. (12.10.2017. SKA-668\/2017).<\/p>\n

K\u0101 saprast kvalifik\u0101cijas pras\u012bbas?<\/b> Pirmk\u0101rt, objekt\u012bvi uztveram\u0101 teksta robe\u017e\u0101s. Pieteic\u0113ja uzskat\u012bja, ka pras\u012bts tr\u012bs gadu kop\u0113jais, nevis vid\u0113jais apgroz\u012bjuma l\u012bmenis. AT ieskat\u0101 pras\u012bba \u201cpretendenta kop\u0113jais neto apgroz\u012bjums vid\u0113ji iepriek\u0161\u0113jos tr\u012bs gados<\/i>\u201d formul\u0113ta pietiekami skaidri un saprotami, saturot ar\u012b v\u0101rdu \u201cvid\u0113jais\u201d. Pieteic\u0113jai k\u0101 pien\u0101c\u012bgi inform\u0113tam un pieredz\u0113ju\u0161am pretendentam nebija pamata to saprast cit\u0101d\u0101k, savuk\u0101rt \u0161aubas bija nov\u0113r\u0161amas, pieprasot papildu inform\u0101ciju. (12.10.2017. SKA-668\/2017). Vienlaikus pras\u012bbas ir interpret\u0113jamas ar\u012b t\u0101d\u0113j\u0101di, lai ieg\u016btu to praktisko iedarb\u012bbu. Piem\u0113ram, neb\u016btu j\u0113gas izvirz\u012bt pras\u012bbu par akredit\u0113tu studiju programmu un l\u016bgt iesniegt to apliecino\u0161u dokumentu, ja vienlaikus b\u016btu at\u013cauts pied\u0101v\u0101t t\u0101dus studiju kursus, kas \u0161aj\u0101 programm\u0101 visp\u0101r nav iek\u013cauti, un v\u0113l\u0101k l\u012bguma izpildes laik\u0101 akredit\u0113t t\u0101da satura studiju programmu, k\u0101da nepiecie\u0161ama pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam. (22.09.2017. SKA-558\/2017). T\u0101p\u0113c pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101js nevar pa\u013cauties, ka tam neskaidr\u0101s pras\u012bbas vienm\u0113r tiks tulkotas tam par labu. T\u0101pat ieteicams r\u0113\u0137in\u0101ties ar cilv\u0113cisko faktoru, piem\u0113ram, vair\u0101kiem darbiniekiem kop\u012bgi lasot un p\u0101rrun\u0101jot pras\u012bbu formul\u0113jumu, lai laic\u012bgi konstat\u0113tu at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgas izpratnes iesp\u0113ju.<\/p>\n

Nekvalitat\u012bva tehnisk\u0101 specifik\u0101cija? <\/b>No PIL viedok\u013ca noz\u012bme ir vien\u012bgi tam, vai izvirz\u012bt\u0101s pras\u012bbas ir vienl\u012bdz\u012bgas pret visiem pretendentiem un nav diskrimin\u0113jo\u0161as. Iepirkuma priek\u0161meta kvalitat\u012bvo pras\u012bbu noteik\u0161ana, cikt\u0101l tas nepamatoti neierobe\u017eo konkurenci, ir vien\u012bgi pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja izv\u0113les br\u012bv\u012bba. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c, ja nav saskat\u0101ms m\u0113r\u0137is nepamatoti ierobe\u017eot konkurenci, \u0101rpus pretendentu un tiesas kompetences ir v\u0113rt\u0113jums par to, vai tie\u0161\u0101m pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam nepiecie\u0161ams ieg\u0101d\u0101ties konkr\u0113to iepirkuma priek\u0161metu un vai tehniskaj\u0101 specifik\u0101cij\u0101 izvirz\u012bt\u0101s pras\u012bbas iesp\u0113jams aizst\u0101t ar cit\u0101m. (07.07.2017. SKA-228\/2017). <\/p>\n

Neredzam\u0101s nulles.<\/b> Pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101jiem j\u0101b\u016bt piesardz\u012bgiem ar veidlapu format\u0113juma main\u012b\u0161anu un tuk\u0161u ai\u013cu atst\u0101\u0161anu. Atlaides vai izmaksu 0,00 eiro apm\u0113r\u0101 nor\u0101d\u012b\u0161ana pati par sevi nav pamats autom\u0101tiskai noraid\u012b\u0161anai un ir iesp\u0113ja l\u016bgt izskaidrot cenas pamatot\u012bbu. Tom\u0113r \u0161o iesp\u0113ju ir v\u0113rts apsv\u0113rt, ja pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam objekt\u012bvi var\u0113ja rasties \u0161aubas par pied\u0101v\u0101juma saturu. Ja pretendents main\u012bjis format\u0113jumu un \u201c0,00\u201d izmaksas nav redzamas (t\u0101s ir baltas uz balta fona), tai skait\u0101 poz\u012bcij\u0101s, kur izmaksas rodas, lo\u0123ika ne\u013cauj par pa\u0161saprotamu pie\u0146emt, ka izmaksu tur nav vai pied\u0101v\u0101ta atlaide. (23.10.2017. SKA-678\/2017). Ja nolikum\u0101 paredz\u0113ts, ka k\u0101da pakalpojuma komponente j\u0101izceno atsevi\u0161\u0137i, un \u0161ai cenai ir noz\u012bme saimnieciski izdev\u012bg\u0101k\u0101 pied\u0101v\u0101juma izv\u0113l\u0113, pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja r\u012bc\u012bba, akcept\u0113jot pied\u0101v\u0101jumu, kur\u0101 \u0161\u012b cena faktiski iek\u013cauta cit\u0101 poz\u012bcij\u0101, var rad\u012bt vienl\u012bdz\u012bgas attieksmes principa p\u0101rk\u0101pumu. (23.10.2017. SKA-776\/2017).<\/p>\n

Nepamatoti l\u0113ts pied\u0101v\u0101jums. <\/b>Pretendenta interes\u0113s ir sniegt iesp\u0113jami detaliz\u0113tu skaidrojumu par apst\u0101k\u013ciem, kas \u013cauj pied\u0101v\u0101t tik zemu cenu, k\u0101 ar\u012b iesniegt visus t\u0101 r\u012bc\u012bb\u0101 eso\u0161os pier\u0101d\u012bjumus. Savuk\u0101rt pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam, neg\u016bstot apliecin\u0101jumu par cenas pamatot\u012bbu, nav pien\u0101kuma nor\u0101d\u012bt, kas v\u0113l j\u0101iesniedz. Piem\u0113ram, pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js var nepie\u0146emt par pietiekami ticamu pieteic\u0113jas m\u0101tessabiedr\u012bbas apsol\u012bjumu pie\u0161\u0137irt atlaides, ja par to tikai sniegta inform\u0101cija, ka t\u0101da atlaide var\u0113tu tikt dota. Ja cen\u0101 nav iek\u013cauti t\u0101di maks\u0101jumi, kas saska\u0146\u0101 ar normat\u012bvajiem aktiem ir oblig\u0101ti, tas var rad\u012bt \u0161aubas, vai pas\u016bt\u012bjums vis\u0101 l\u012bguma darb\u012bbas laik\u0101 var\u0113tu tikt izpild\u012bts par s\u0101kotn\u0113jo cenu. \u0160\u0101d\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 pretendenta interes\u0113s ir p\u0101rliecin\u0101t pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ju, ka t\u0101 darbiniekiem izmaks\u0101jam\u0101 atl\u012bdz\u012bba sasniegs normat\u012bvajos aktos noteikto l\u012bmeni. Augst\u0101ka iest\u0101de un tiesa, p\u0101rbaudot l\u0113muma tiesiskumu, \u0146em v\u0113r\u0101 to, k\u0101di dokumenti bija pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja r\u012bc\u012bb\u0101 l\u0113muma pie\u0146em\u0161anas laik\u0101, bet pati neveic cenas pamatot\u012bbas p\u0101rbaudi. T\u0101pat tiesai nav kompetences iejaukties pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja nov\u0113rt\u0113juma br\u012bv\u012bb\u0101, tai ir j\u0101p\u0101rbauda vien\u012bgi tas, vai r\u012bc\u012bba, neveicot cenas pamatojuma p\u0101rbaudi, nav ac\u012bmredzami k\u013c\u016bdaina. (30.11.2017. SKA-765\/2017). Skaidrojuma piepras\u012b\u0161ana no pretendenta ir v\u0113rsta uz to, lai dotu iesp\u0113ju pretendentam pamatot, ka pied\u0101v\u0101jums, lai ar\u012b t\u0101 cena ir zema, ir nopietns un \u012bsts, un lai iepirkumu komisija k\u013c\u016bdaini nenoraid\u012btu objekt\u012bvi izdev\u012bg\u0101ko pied\u0101v\u0101jumu. Tas attiecin\u0101ms ar\u012b uz \u201cmazajiem\u201d iepirkumiem. (23.10.2017. SKA-776\/2017). Ar\u012b saist\u012bb\u0101 ar v\u0113rt\u0113\u0161anas krit\u0113rijiem AT nor\u0101d\u012bjusi, ka tas, ka uz konkr\u0113to iepirkumu attiecas \u201cmazajam\u201d iepirkumam noteikt\u0101 k\u0101rt\u012bba, nenoz\u012bm\u0113, ka \u0161\u0101 iepirkuma kontekst\u0101 cit\u0101d\u0101k uztverami publisko iepirkumu principi, l\u012bdz ar to ir nosak\u0101mi skaidri un saprotami v\u0113rt\u0113\u0161anas krit\u0113riji. (28.12.2017. SKA-326\/2017).<\/p>\n

Nepietiekams pamatojums zi\u0146ojum\u0101.<\/b> Ja iepirkums turpin\u0101ts ar vienu pras\u012bb\u0101m atbilsto\u0161u pretendentu, str\u012bda gad\u012bjum\u0101 pras\u012bbu pamatojumu var izv\u0113rst. Par gad\u012bjumu, kad pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js nevar pamatot, ka pras\u012bbas ir sam\u0113r\u012bgas un objekt\u012bvas, un t\u0101d\u0113\u013c iepirkums j\u0101p\u0101rtrauc, nevar uzskat\u012bt situ\u0101ciju, kad pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js visp\u0101r pamatojumu iepirkuma zi\u0146ojum\u0101 nor\u0101d\u012bjis, ta\u010du tas v\u0113l\u0101k atz\u012bts par nepietiekamu. Tikai tad, ja tiesa no pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja argument\u0101cijas un pier\u0101d\u012bjumiem tiesved\u012bbas gait\u0101 neg\u016bst p\u0101rliec\u012bbu, ka pras\u012bbas ir sam\u0113r\u012bgas un objekt\u012bvas, ir pamats secin\u0101t, ka iepirkums j\u0101p\u0101rtrauc. (12.10.2017. SKA-668\/2017).<\/p>\n

Cik \u0101tri j\u0101s\u016bdzas?<\/b> Ja pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101js nepiekr\u012bt nolikuma pras\u012bb\u0101m, iesniegums par to ir j\u0101iesniedz PIL noteiktaj\u0101 termi\u0146\u0101. Ja tas nav dar\u012bts, pretendentam j\u0101r\u0113\u0137in\u0101s ar \u0161\u012bm pras\u012bb\u0101m un j\u0101sagatavo atbilsto\u0161s pied\u0101v\u0101jums. Konkr\u0113taj\u0101 liet\u0101 nebija iesp\u0113jams iek\u013cauties \u0161aj\u0101 termi\u0146\u0101, jo pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja ar v\u0113l\u0101kiem skaidrojumiem atkl\u0101jusi t\u0101du pras\u012bbu saturu, k\u0101ds nav bijis saprotams nolikuma public\u0113\u0161anas laik\u0101, t.i., termi\u0146\u0161 s\u016bdz\u012bbu iesnieg\u0161anai beidz\u0101s tad, kad objekt\u012bvi k\u013cuva zin\u0101ms pras\u012bbu saturs. Atsevi\u0161\u0137os gad\u012bjumos s\u016bdz\u012bba par nolikuma pras\u012bb\u0101m un attiec\u012bgi to tiesiskuma p\u0101rbaude pie\u013caujama ar\u012b p\u0113c noteikt\u0101 termi\u0146a pras\u012bbu apstr\u012bd\u0113\u0161anai, ta\u010du t\u0101 termi\u0146a ietvaros, kas noteikts rezult\u0101tu apstr\u012bd\u0113\u0161anai. Tom\u0113r no iepirkumu proced\u016bras efektivit\u0101tes principa un priv\u0101tpersonas ties\u012bbu godpr\u0101t\u012bgas izmanto\u0161anas principa izriet priv\u0101tpersonas pien\u0101kums dar\u012bt zin\u0101mas savas pretenzijas pret pras\u012bb\u0101m p\u0113c iesp\u0113jas \u0101tr\u0101k. Ja pretendents pretenziju izteik\u0161anu pret pras\u012bb\u0101m pak\u0101rto iepirkuma rezult\u0101tam, AT ieskat\u0101 to nevar atz\u012bt par godpr\u0101t\u012bgu savu ties\u012bbu izmanto\u0161anu. (24.11.2017. SKA-1162\/2017).<\/p>\n

S\u016bdz\u012bbas atst\u0101\u0161ana bez izskat\u012b\u0161anas.<\/b> AT atg\u0101din\u0101jusi, ka procesu\u0101li \u0161\u0101ds l\u0113mums nav administrat\u012bvais akts, bet gan procesu\u0101ls l\u0113mums, jo nerisina jaut\u0101jumu par iepirkuma proced\u016bras tiesiskumu p\u0113c b\u016bt\u012bbas. Ja tas ties\u0101 p\u0101rs\u016bdz\u0113ts, tiesa ne tikai p\u0101rbauda, vai Iepirkumu uzraudz\u012bbas birojs (IUB) pamatoti atst\u0101jis bez izskat\u012b\u0161anas iesniegumu, bet, nekonstat\u0113jot pamatojumu, pati p\u0101rbauda s\u016bdz\u012bb\u0101 min\u0113tos argumentus, sprieduma rezolut\u012bvaj\u0101 da\u013c\u0101 lemjot vien\u012bgi par pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja l\u0113mumu vai r\u012bc\u012bbu, nevis par IUB l\u0113mumu. Iz\u0146\u0113mums b\u016btu vien\u012bgi tad, ja pieteic\u0113js nor\u0101d\u012btu uz Administrat\u012bv\u0101 procesa likuma (APL) 184.panta otraj\u0101 da\u013c\u0101 min\u0113to priek\u0161nosac\u012bjumu iest\u0101\u0161anos, kas savuk\u0101rt liktu tiesai spriedumu tais\u012bt ar\u012b par iest\u0101des procesu\u0101lo p\u0101rk\u0101pumu \u2013 IUB l\u0113muma atz\u012b\u0161anu par prettiesisku. (07.07.2017. SKA-228\/2017).<\/p>\n

Ties\u012bbas iesniegt pieteikumu ties\u0101.<\/b> Attiec\u012bb\u0101 uz pieteikumu par administrat\u012bv\u0101 akta atz\u012b\u0161anu par prettiesisku AT ieskat\u0101 b\u016btiska ties\u012bbu vai tiesisko intere\u0161u aizsk\u0101ruma krit\u0113rijs k\u0101 pieteikuma pie\u013caujam\u012bbas priek\u0161noteikums (APL 184. panta otr\u0101 da\u013ca) attiecin\u0101ms tikai uz pieteikumiem par procesu\u0101l\u0101 p\u0101rk\u0101puma konstat\u0113\u0161anu, nevis uz pieteikumiem par administrat\u012bv\u0101 akta atz\u012b\u0161anu par prettiesisku. Savuk\u0101rt priek\u0161noteikums, ka pieteikums tiek iesniegts, lai nov\u0113rstu l\u012bdz\u012bgu gad\u012bjumu atk\u0101rto\u0161anos, publisko iepirkumu gad\u012bjum\u0101 nav piem\u0113rojams form\u0101li, t.i., to nevar v\u0113rt\u0113t tikai no t\u0101 aspekta, vai t\u0101dos pa\u0161os tiesiskos un faktiskos apst\u0101k\u013cos sam\u0113r\u0101 tuv\u0101 laik\u0101 iest\u0101de var\u0113tu r\u012bkoties t\u0101pat. Iz\u0161\u0137iro\u0161ais ir tas, vai tiesisk\u0101 str\u012bda, par kuru ir iesniegts pieteikums, atrisin\u0101jums var\u0113tu b\u016bt aktu\u0101ls citos l\u012bdz\u012bgos (ne oblig\u0101ti tie\u0161i t\u0101dos pa\u0161os) gad\u012bjumos, kuru iest\u0101\u0161an\u0101s iesp\u0113ja ir objekt\u012bvi ticama. (18.09.2017. SKA-1386\/2017). Bet past\u0101v ierobe\u017eojumi jaunu argumentu izvirz\u012b\u0161anai p\u0113c tam, kad ir iesniegta s\u016bdz\u012bba IUB. Person\u0101m, kuras uzskata, ka ir noticis p\u0101rk\u0101pums, ir uzreiz (likum\u0101 noteiktaj\u0101 s\u016bdz\u012bbas iesnieg\u0161anas termi\u0146\u0101) j\u0101nor\u0101da uz konkr\u0113tu p\u0101rk\u0101pumu un apst\u0101k\u013ciem, kuru d\u0113\u013c ir pamats \u0161o p\u0101rk\u0101pumu konstat\u0113t. (17.10.2017. SKA-858\/2017).<\/p>\n

Zaud\u0113jumi? <\/b>Prasot ties\u0101 administrat\u012bv\u0101 akta atz\u012b\u0161anu par prettiesisku, jo tas nepiecie\u0161ams v\u0113l\u0101kai atl\u012bdzin\u0101juma pras\u012b\u0161anai, nav j\u0101pier\u0101da zaud\u0113jumi vai kait\u0113jums t\u0101d\u0101 pak\u0101p\u0113, k\u0101 uzreiz piesakot \u0161\u0101du pras\u012bjumu. Tom\u0113r personai j\u0101sp\u0113j visp\u0101r\u012bgi paskaidrot, k\u0101 veidoju\u0161ies zaud\u0113jumi vai radies kait\u0113jums un k\u0101d\u0101 veid\u0101 tas ir c\u0113lo\u0146sakar\u012bgi saist\u012bts ar p\u0101rs\u016bdzamo administrat\u012bvo aktu. C\u0113lo\u0146sakar\u012bba, kas ir priek\u0161noteikums zaud\u0113jumu atl\u012bdzin\u0101\u0161anai, nepast\u0101v, ja t\u0101ds pats zaud\u0113jums b\u016btu radies ar\u012b tad, ja iest\u0101de b\u016btu r\u012bkojusies tiesiski. (18.09.2017. SKA-1386\/2017). Savuk\u0101rt atraut\u0101s pe\u013c\u0146as instit\u016bta kontekst\u0101 zaud\u0113jumu atl\u012bdzin\u0101jums nevar balst\u012bties uz visp\u0101r\u012bgiem pie\u0146\u0113mumiem. Vispirms j\u0101noskaidro, vai pieteic\u0113js iepirkuma proced\u016bras paredzam\u0101s norises gait\u0101 b\u016btu ieguvis ties\u012bbas nosl\u0113gt l\u012bgumu un tikai p\u0113c tam var piev\u0113rsties jaut\u0101jumam, vai un k\u0101d\u0101 apm\u0113r\u0101 pieteic\u0113js l\u012bguma nosl\u0113g\u0161anas rezult\u0101t\u0101 b\u016btu guvis pe\u013c\u0146u, un tas ir j\u0101pier\u0101da pieteic\u0113jam. (22.09.2017. SKA-558\/2017).<\/p>\n

L\u012bguma sp\u0113k\u0101 neesam\u012bba.<\/b> Lai situ\u0101cij\u0101, kad l\u012bgumus nosl\u0113gts neiev\u0113rojot nogaid\u012b\u0161anas termi\u0146u, b\u016btu pamats piem\u0113rot maig\u0101k\u0101s sekas \u2013 l\u012bguma termi\u0146a sa\u012bsin\u0101\u0161anu \u2013 j\u0101\u012bstenojas diviem kumulat\u012bviem priek\u0161nosac\u012bjumiem. Pirmk\u0101rt, ir j\u0101konstat\u0113, ka iepirkuma proced\u016bra l\u012bdz l\u0113muma pie\u0146em\u0161anai par uzvar\u0113t\u0101ja noteik\u0161anu ir veikta saska\u0146\u0101 ar PIL. Otrk\u0101rt, ir j\u0101konstat\u0113, ka l\u0113mums par uzvar\u0113t\u0101ja noteik\u0161anu nav ietekm\u0113jis tie\u0161i pieteic\u0113ja izredzes uzvar\u0113t. Latvijas likumdev\u0113js nogaid\u012b\u0161anas termi\u0146a neiev\u0113ro\u0161anu ir v\u0113rt\u0113jis k\u0101 tik b\u016btisku p\u0101rk\u0101pumu, ka t\u0101 pie\u013cau\u0161anas gad\u012bjum\u0101 l\u012bguma termi\u0146a sa\u012bsin\u0101\u0161anas iesp\u0113ju var piem\u0113rot tikai tad, ja citus p\u0101rk\u0101pumus pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js nav pie\u013c\u0101vis, vai ar\u012b tad, ja tiesa konstat\u0113 b\u016btisku sabiedr\u012bbas interesi, lai iepirkuma l\u012bguma rad\u012bt\u0101s sekas saglab\u0101tos. (07.07.2017. SKA-228\/2017). Jau iepriek\u0161 atz\u012bts, ka iepirkuma l\u012bgumu, kas nosl\u0113gts \u201cmazaj\u0101\u201d iepirkum\u0101, kontrole nav pak\u013cauta administrat\u012bvajai tiesai. T\u0101 k\u0101 \u201cjaunaj\u0101\u201d PIL nav paredz\u0113ts at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgs regul\u0113jums, ar\u012b \u0161obr\u012bd pras\u012bjums par l\u012bguma atz\u012b\u0161anu par sp\u0113k\u0101 neeso\u0161u nav izskat\u0101ms administrat\u012bv\u0101 procesa k\u0101rt\u012bb\u0101. (09.08.2017. SKA-1458\/2017).<\/p>\n

1. Prakses apkopojums pieejams AT m\u0101jaslap\u0101, spriedumus iesp\u0113jams atrast https:\/\/manas.tiesas.lv\/eTiesas\/<\/a> sada\u013c\u0101 \u201cAnonimiz\u0113ti tiesu nol\u0113mumi\u201d lauk\u0101 \u201cMekl\u0113t nol\u0113muma tekst\u0101\u201d nor\u0101dot attiec\u012bgo numuru.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup> <\/p>\n

2. L\u012bdz 28.02.2017. paredz\u0113ja iepirkuma p\u0101rtrauk\u0161anu viena atlases pras\u012bb\u0101m atbilsto\u0161a pretendenta gad\u012bjum\u0101, ja nav iesp\u0113jams pamatot pras\u012bbu sam\u0113r\u012bgumu un objektivit\u0101ti.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup> <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u0160aj\u0101 rakst\u0101 sniegts \u012bss ieskats Latvijas Republikas Augst\u0101k\u0101s tiesas (AT) publiski pieejamo 2017. gada otr\u0101s puses nol\u0113mumos publisko iepirkumu liet\u0101s paustaj\u0101s atzi\u0146\u0101s, pla\u0161\u0101kai izpratnei aicinot iepaz\u012bties ar pa\u0161iem nol\u0113mumiem, k\u0101 ar\u012b AT prakses apkopojumu (prakses apkopojums pieejams AT m\u0101jaslap\u0101, spriedumus iesp\u0113jams atrast https:\/\/manas.tiesas.lv\/eTiesas\/<\/a> sada\u013c\u0101 \u201cAnonimiz\u0113ti tiesu nol\u0113mumi\u201d lauk\u0101 \u201cMekl\u0113t nol\u0113muma).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[174,43],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9160"}],"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=9160"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9160\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9163,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9160\/revisions\/9163"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9160"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9160"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9160"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}