Appeal of Asylum Facility Procurement Award Decision Annulment
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertA company appealed a procurement authority's decision regarding the award of general planning services (SIA Phases 32, 33, 41, 51, 52, 53) for the replacement construction of an asylum facility, where the initial award decision was successfully challenged by a competitor in a lower court. The appeal concerned whether the lower court erred in finding that the award decision was flawed based on the assessment of the competing bids. The court ultimately found no basis to overturn the lower court's reasoned decision, which had concluded that the initial award criteria were misapplied or that the evaluation process introduced an unjustified disparity between the competitors, thus upholding the annulment of the original award.
Legislator-Regeste
AmtlichÖffentliches Beschaffungsrecht (Vergabeentscheid D._________: Ersatzbau Asylunterkunft E:__________; Generalplanerleistungen für die SIA-Phasen 32, 33, 41, 51, 52, 53) | Öffentliches Beschaffungsrecht
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertVolltext
\n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | | |\n III 2024 40 |\n |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 27. Juni 2024 |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n Dr.iur. Vital Zehnder, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Monica Huber-Landolt, Richterin lic.iur. Karl Gasser, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n lic.iur. Josef Mathis, Gerichtsschreiber |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n A.________ AG, \n Beschwerdeführerin, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt B.________ |\n \n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n Bezirk C.________, handelnd durch den Bezirksrat, \n Vorinstanz, |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | |
|\n Gegenstand |\n Öffentliches Beschaffungsrecht (Vergabeentscheid D.________: \n Ersatzbau Asylunterkunft E.________; Generalplaner \n leistungen für die SIA-Phasen 32, 33, 41, 51, 52, 53) |\n
\n\n
\n
Sachverhalt: