OREANDA-NEWS. October 25, 2012. The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) found that the “Federal Passenger Company” OJSC - “FPK” OJSC (a subsidiary of “Russian Railways” OJSC) violated Part 1 Article 17 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition” in an open tender for a contract for the works for technical maintenance and repair of electric and electronic equipment in passenger cars of all types in 2012-2026, reported the press-centre of FAS Russia.

Upon notifying about the tender, “FPK” OJSC initiated several changes in the tender documentation and tightened the qualifying requirements to the bidders. One of the novelties was that the bidders had to have annual average experience of works, similar to the tender subject, no less than 15% of the approximate annual output specified in the technical assignment for the tender, which was nearly one billion Rubles.

Four economic entities filed tender bids, three of which were recognized inconsistent with the qualifying requirements specified in the tender documentation. Therefore the tender was declared void, and “FPK” OJSC concluded the contract with the only bidder allowed to take part in the tender – “Transport Repair Company” Ltd.

Investigating the case, the FAS Commission concluded that “Transport Repair Company” Ltd. effectively was the only market participant with such considerable experience of the works similar to the tender subject because the company had been carrying upon such works upon orders of “FPK” OJSC since 2010.

“The FAS Commission decided to file a lawsuit to invalidate the tenders organized by “FPK” OJSC and the contract concluded upon the tender outcome”, pointed out Deputy Head of FAS Department for Control over Industry and Defence Complex, Andrey Greshyov.

Reference:

Part 1 Article 17 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition” prohibits actions in the course of tenders, and quotation requests that lead or can lead to preventing, restricting or eliminating competition.

Under Part 4 Article 17 of the Federal Law “On Protection of Competition” violating the rules established by this Article constitutes the grounds for Court of Law to hold void tenders, quotations requests and transactions concluded such tenders, quotation requests, in particular, upon a claim filed by the antimonopoly authority.