601.72
ÖBGLCMPLAPP
CH-NE
CH-NE
Art. premier Legge sugli appalti pubblici (LAPP), del 5 settembre 2023 - Oggetto
6 Finanze - 60 Gestione finanziaria
Art. premier Legge sugli appalti pubblici (LAPP), del 5 settembre 2023 - Oggetto · Oggetto
La presente legge si applica all'aggiudicazione di appalti pubblici da parte degli enti appaltanti situati sul territorio cantonale, in complemento all'Accordo intercantonale sugli appalti pubblici (di seguito: AIMP), del 15 novembre 2019.
Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (8)
CDP.2019.358 · ne (art. 1 al. 2 let. b LCMP)
Contract Award Re-Tender Challenge
Cited in the reasoning regarding the goal of equality of treatment, relevant to the analysis of the third ground for appeal.
CDP.2016.27 · ne (art. 1 al. 2 let. a à d LCMP)
Contract Award Upheld Despite Bidder's Prior Tender Involvement
Cited in the reasoning to establish the goals of public procurement law, but not in the operative orders.
CDP.2012.334 · ne (art. 1 al. 2 let. a à d LCMP)
Public Entity Disability Insurance Contract Award Annulled Due to Flawed Evaluation Methodology
Cited in the reasoning regarding the goals of public procurement law (transparency, efficiency, etc.).
CDP.2012.334 · ne (art. 1 al. 2 let. b LCMP)
Public Entity Disability Insurance Contract Award Annulled Due to Flawed Evaluation Methodology
Cited in the reasoning regarding the transparency principle violated by the inconsistent rating scales.
TA.2010.175 · ne (Art. 1 al.2 litt.a à d LCMP)
Sewage Treatment Contract Award Annulled Over Post-Deadline Modification and Flawed Evaluation
Cited in the reasoning explaining the objectives of public procurement law.
TA.2010.175 · ne (Art. 1 al.2 litt.b LCMP)
Sewage Treatment Contract Award Annulled Over Post-Deadline Modification and Flawed Evaluation
Cited in the reasoning leading to the annulment, concerning the goal of guaranteeing equal treatment among bidders.
TA.2003.304 · ne (art.1 al.2 litt.a et b LCMP)
Consortium Challenge of Tender Award Based on Post-Submission Criterion Changes
The court found that the method of scoring for the 'organization' criterion violated the principles of efficient competition and equal treatment/impartiality in public procurement.
TA.2002.176 · ne (art.1 al.2 litt.a à c LCMP)
Public Procurement Award Unlawful Due to Undisclosed Sub-Criteria
These principles (effective competition, impartiality, transparency) underpinned the finding that the procedure was irregular, leading to the admission of the appeal.