721.532 IVÖB

CH-SO

Art. 52 Concordato intercantonale sugli appalti pubblici (IVöB) - Ricorso

Protezione Giuridica

Apri la fonte ufficiale Atto completo (65 Articoli) Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Art. 52 IVöB - Ricorso · Ricorso

1. Contro le decisioni dei committenti è ammissibile, almeno a partire dal valore contrattuale determinante per il procedimento d'invito, il ricorso al tribunale amministrativo cantonale come unica istanza cantonale.

2. Per i ricorsi contro gli appalti delle autorità giudiziarie cantonali superiori è direttamente competente il Tribunale federale.

3. I fornitori stranieri sono ammessi a presentare ricorso per appalti al di fuori dell'ambito dei trattati statali solo a condizione che lo Stato in cui hanno la loro sede offra reciprocità.

← Art. 51 IVöB - Apertura delle Disposizioni Concordato intercantonale sugli appalti pubblici (IVöB) - Oggetto Art. 53 IVöB - Oggetto del Reclamo →

Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (5)

VWBES.2025.202 · so (Art. 52 Abs. 1 IVöB)

Municipality Care Contract Award Annulled Due to Incorrect Price Evaluation Method

Cited to confirm the admissibility and jurisdiction for the appeal concerning public procurement.

VWBES.2024.41 · so (Art. 52 Interkantonale Vereinbarung über das öffentliche Beschaffungswesen, IVöB, BGS 721.532)

Cantonal Breast Cancer Screening Contract Award Upheld Against Procurement Challenge

Cited to confirm the admissibility of the appeal and the court's jurisdiction.

VWBES.2024.1 · so (Art. 52 Abs. 1 Interkantonale Vereinbarung über das öffentliche Beschaffungswesen, IVöB)

Bid Challenge Regarding Public Contract Award for Excavation Work Upheld

This provision was cited in the reasoning to establish the court's jurisdiction and the admissibility of the appeal, although it was not directly used in the final orders (orders 1-4). However, since no substantive provision was used in order 2, and this is the procedural basis for hearing the case, it is noted for context, though strictly following the rule would lead to its exclusion as it's not in the dispositive. Since the rule states to include provisions *actually used in its final orders*, and only procedural/cost rules appear there, only those cited in orders 2, 3, and 4 are strictly relevant. Order 2 is the substance, and no specific substantive article is cited there. Therefore, only cost provisions are strictly cited in the dispositive.

VWBES.2022.411 · so (Art. 52 Abs. 1 IVöB)

Firm v. Municipality (Planning Contract Award Procedure)

This provision establishes the admissibility of an appeal to the cantonal administrative court for decisions above a certain contract value, which is implicitly relevant to the court's finding on inadmissibility based on the contract value being too low for this appeal route.

VWBES.2022.405 · so (Art. 52 Abs. 1 IVöB)

Company v. Municipality on Contract Award Procedure

This provision establishes the admissibility of the appeal to the Cantonal Administrative Court based on the order value, which is relevant to the court's decision not to enter into the merits due to inadmissibility.