Krajska zdravotni did not proceed in accordance with the law when purchasing equipment

The Office for the Protection of Competition imposed by its first instance decision the fine of CZK 600,000 for the violation of the Act on Public Contracts on the company Krajská zdravotní.

The Office for the Protection of Competition imposed by its first instance decision the fine of CZK 600,000 for the violation of the Act on Public Contracts on the company Krajská zdravotní. The contracting authority violated the law in public contracts on the purchase of medical equipment for traumatology centre and oncology centre of the Masaryk Hospital in the city of Ústí nad Labem. The decision has not come into force yet and the appeal against it might be filed.

Krajská zdravotní committed four administrative offences in awarding procedures “Modernization and renovation of instrumentation in a specialized centre – Traumatology Centre of Krajská zdravotní a.s. – Masaryk Hospital in Ústí nad Labem” and “Modernization and renovation of instrumentation in a specialized centre – Oncology Centre of Krajská zdravotní a.s. – Masaryk Hospital in Ústí nad Labem”. The terms of the evaluation sub-criteria “Costs of maintenance services per year (beyond the free warranty service)” were not defined in any of the public contracts. The tender documentation did not define the content or the scope and terms of the maintenance service relating to the required medical equipment and at the same time it was not specified how the contracting authority will evaluate this sub-criterion. The selected tenderer in its tender stated only the amount for which the maintenance service will be carried out, however it did not specify the service activities as such. Krajská zdravotní breached the principle of transparency when the subject-matter of both public contracts was not specified in detail necessary for drawing up tenders. The selection of the most suitable tender could be affected by this conduct.

The contracting authority also required in both public contracts in the framework of fulfilment of technical qualifications prerequisites the submission of a certificate of ISO 13485:2003 quality management system and the evidence proving the implementation of information security management in an organization. These two documents however are not among certificates which can be required according to the act. Also this conduct of the contracting authority could affect the selection of the most suitable tender, as of 13, respectively 15, suppliers who picked up the tender documentation, only the selected tenderer submitted its offer. It is conceivable that if the contracting authority required only documents stipulated by the act, more tenderers with potentially more favourable offers would participate in the awarding procedure.

International and External Relations of the Office