"People who live in glass houses should not throw stones»
- this proverb is quite often applicable to cases brought before the regional commissions of the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation. The Customer, trying to condemn the Participant in a breach of a public procurement contract and applying for his enrollment into the Register of Bad-faith Suppliers, does not admit that he himself violates the terms of the concluded contract.
The members of the St. Petersburg`s commission of Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation on the control of procurement faced recently such a situation while considering the case of the St. Petersburg`s GBU "Kurortny bereg" against "Detskie ploschadky 125".
On 26 of September, 2016 the state contract on the procurement of children's playgrounds has been concluded between the St. Petersburg`s state-financed entity on the improvement "Kurortny bereg" and the OOO "Detskie ploschadky 125" company on the results of the electronic auction.
The OOO "Detskie ploschadky 125" company specializes in the supply of children's playgrounds. The main manufacturing unit of the company is located in southern China, at the factory with more than 20-year long history and a very good reputation.
The manufacturing factory`s working process complies with the requirements of all international quality systems and the manufacturer has all confirming certificates. The high quality of production, open relationship and a very responsible approach enable OOO "Detskie ploschadky 125" to fulfill orders always at the highest level, regardless of the bottom-line price of the concluded contract.
In the case of the execution of the state contract concluded with the St. Petersburg`s GBU "Kurortny bereg", OOO "Detskie ploschadky 125" has acted in good faith: the necessary goods were purchased, and the company intended to supply in the period specified by the contract.
However, the Customer decided to terminate the contract because of the improper interpretation of the contract terms. Moreover, the Customer applied to the St. Petersburg`s Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service for the enrollment of the OOO "Detskie ploschadky 125" company into the Register of Bad-faith Suppliers. The situation could have had very negative consequences for the OOO "Detskie ploschadky 125" company without a well-timed and high-qualified legal support.
The company's management appealed to the Legal Business Solutions Law Firm for a legal support of the case.
First of all, the experienced specialists of the Legal Business Solutions Law Firm had been discussing this issue with the Customer of the state contract for a long time. Our lawyers had proposed various ways for the solution of the problem, in order to have the ability to remedy the violations of legislation and the terms of the Contract, as well as to renew the Contract and the fulfillment of the obligations in full.
However, the goals of the St. Petersburg`s GBU "Kurortny bereg" differed and the Customer had not taken appropriate measures in order to resolve the conflict.
During the commission of the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation, the lawyers of the Legal Business Solutions Law Firm introduced the whole essence of the conflict.
The words of the lawyers had been confirmed by the official correspondence with the Customer, which reflected a conscientious attitude of the Participant and its intention to execute a government contract in full. Although the contract has been terminated, the company OOO "Detskie ploschadky 125" has not been included into the Register of Bad-faith Suppliers and the company kept up its good name and reputation thanks to the professional work of the lawyers of the Legal Business Solutions Law Firm.
Moreover, the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation has raised the question of initiating of a case on an administrative violationin regard to the Customer, namely the violation of the order of a unilateral refusal to perform the contract and non-compliance with the time-limits of the termination of a contract, set by Article 95 Law on the contractual system.