Public procurement: rights of unsuccessful bidders
The legal framework
Public procurement in Switzerland is governed, depending on the level, by the federal Public Procurement Act for the Confederation, and by the Intercantonal Agreement on Public Procurement and cantonal implementing laws for cantons and municipalities. These rules aim in particular to ensure transparent, non-discriminatory competition among bidders.
The award decision
The award of a contract to a bidder is the subject of an award decision, notified to all participants in the procedure. This decision must state the essential grounds for the award and the legal remedies available to unsuccessful bidders.
Appealing the award
An unsuccessful bidder can challenge the award decision before the competent appeal authority (cantonal or federal court depending on the level of the contract), generally within a particularly short deadline, on the order of ten to twenty days depending on the applicable legislation: it is essential to check the exact deadline stated in the decision itself without delay.
Common grounds for appeal
Appeals most often concern failure to comply with the announced award criteria, inconsistent evaluation of bids, unjustified exclusion from the procedure, or a violation of the principles of transparency and equal treatment of bidders.
Frequently asked questions
Within what deadline can an unsuccessful bidder appeal?
The deadline is particularly short in public procurement matters, generally on the order of ten to twenty days depending on the applicable legislation. It is essential to check the exact deadline stated in the notified award decision.
Do a cantonal contract and a federal contract follow the same rules?
No, a federal contract falls under the federal Public Procurement Act, while a cantonal or municipal contract falls under the Intercantonal Agreement on Public Procurement and the cantonal implementing law, whose procedural details may differ.
On what grounds can I challenge an award?
In particular failure to comply with the announced award criteria, inconsistent evaluation of bids, unjustified exclusion, or a violation of the principles of transparency and equal treatment of bidders.