The Supreme Economic Court Held up the Conclusions of the AMC Regarding the Plot at the Bidding for the Water Supply and Sewage Construction
As the Supreme Economic Court of Ukraine established on 04.07.2017, the local economic court and the economic court of appeal, having examined the circumstances of the case, investigated the arguments of the Transcarpathian Regional Territorial Department of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine that were posited for the conclusions of the agreement of the competitive behavior of the LLC “KALINA IF LTD” Firm during the bidding process of the Solomonivska Village Council, has concluded about the disputed decision making by the AMC within its authorities and about the lack of grounds for invalidating the decision of the Transcarpathian Territorial Department of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine from 31.08.2016 Nr 25-р/к.
Since 2012 till 2016 the confusing court practice existed regarding the issues of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine decisions challenging regarding the anti-competitive concerned actions, concerning the distortion of results of bids, auctions, competitions, tenders.
But, in this case the Supreme Economic Court of Ukraine concluded, that the competition during the bidding procedure is provided by the data secrecy; the bidding procedure participants competition, taking into account the provisions of the articles of the Law of Ukraine “On the economic competition protection” provides the personal and independent actions (behavior) of each of the participants and their duty to independently prepare their bidding proposals, without the interaction; such competition includes the provided circumstances by the Transcarpathian Territorial Department of the AMC, which witness the coordinated behavior of the LLC “KALINA IF LTD” Firm that lead to the bidding results distortion.
Moreover, as the court stated, the references of the LLC “KALINA IF LTD” Firm to the Supreme Economic Court of Ukraine resolution, adopted in another case, – can’t be taken into account, as this resolution, was adopted at the facts and evidential basis other than in this case, that is even for such legal regulation, but another circumstances, established by the previous courts, and another submitted by the parties and assessed by the courts evidences, depending on which (circumstances and evidences) the appropriate judicial decision was made.