{"id":23252,"date":"2025-06-25T17:08:31","date_gmt":"2025-06-25T15:08:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/abante.de\/plausibility-of-the-assessments-in-the-award-procedure\/"},"modified":"2026-02-19T11:30:55","modified_gmt":"2026-02-19T10:30:55","slug":"plausibility-of-the-assessments-in-the-award-procedure","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/plausibility-of-the-assessments-in-the-award-procedure\/","title":{"rendered":"Plau\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty of the assess\u00adments in the award pro\u00adce\u00addure"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On June 13, 2025, our lawyer <a href=\"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/team-mitglieder\/anne-grahl\/\" data-type=\"team-mitglieder\" data-id=\"238\">Anne Grahl<\/a> dealt with the deci\u00adsion of the Bavar\u00adi\u00adan Supreme Court of May 7, 2025 (Ref.: Verg 8\/24) in an abante live on pub\u00adlic pro\u00adcure\u00adment law.  <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Bavar\u00adi\u00adan Supreme Court has made an insight\u00adful deci\u00adsion that focus\u00ades on a fre\u00adquent\u00adly dis\u00adcussed top\u00adic in pub\u00adlic pro\u00adcure\u00adment law: the require\u00adments for the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion of qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive award cri\u00adte\u00adria. The deci\u00adsion makes it clear that eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion deci\u00adsions in the award pro\u00adce\u00addure may not be made at will, but are sub\u00adject to con\u00adsti\u00adtu\u00adtion\u00adal require\u00adments \u2014 in par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar the require\u00adment of trans\u00adparen\u00adcy, equal treat\u00adment of bid\u00adders and the require\u00adment of com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty. This also applies in areas where func\u00adtion\u00adal ten\u00adders require cre\u00adative solu\u00adtions and the con\u00adtract\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adty has a mar\u00adgin of dis\u00adcre\u00adtion. The oblig\u00ada\u00adtion to pro\u00advide com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adble doc\u00adu\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion of the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion is par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar\u00adly empha\u00adsized. If this is miss\u00ading, the award pro\u00adce\u00addure may be open to chal\u00adlenge.      <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Click here for the video of the dis\u00adcus\u00adsion of this deci\u00adsion:  <\/p>\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe hcb-fetch-image-from=\"https:\/\/youtu.be\/kJCTo2lQqjo?si=TnCPcEPQmo_yjv0n\" title=\"Notenvergabe muss plausibel sein\" width=\"800\" height=\"450\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/kJCTo2lQqjo?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Ini\u00adtial sit\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The rul\u00ading of the Bavar\u00adi\u00adan Supreme Court (Bay\u00adObLG) of June 13, 2025 con\u00adcerns a Europe-wide pro\u00adcure\u00adment pro\u00adce\u00addure of a pub\u00adlicly fund\u00aded hos\u00adpi\u00adtal. The sub\u00adject mat\u00adter was the award of a con\u00adtract for the pro\u00advi\u00adsion of cen\u00adtral pro\u00adcure\u00adment ser\u00advices by a pur\u00adchas\u00ading group, which was to con\u00adclude frame\u00adwork agree\u00adments, select prod\u00aducts, iden\u00adti\u00adfy poten\u00adtial sav\u00adings and sup\u00adport strate\u00adgic sup\u00adply struc\u00adtures, among oth\u00ader things.   <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The ten\u00adder was car\u00adried out in an open pro\u00adce\u00addure. The award cri\u00adte\u00adria were divid\u00aded into a price com\u00adpo\u00adnent (30%) and the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion of sev\u00ader\u00adal qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive con\u00adcepts (70%). Among oth\u00ader things, reim\u00adburse\u00adment mod\u00adels, dig\u00adi\u00adtal\u00adiza\u00adtion, inno\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtive capac\u00adi\u00adty, net\u00adwork\u00ading, train\u00ading con\u00adcepts and mea\u00adsures to ensure secu\u00adri\u00adty of sup\u00adply were eval\u00adu\u00adat\u00aded.    <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Two pur\u00adchas\u00ading groups sub\u00admit\u00adted com\u00adplete bids with\u00adin the bid dead\u00adline. While the appli\u00adcant scored par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar\u00adly well in the price cri\u00adte\u00adri\u00adon, the respon\u00addent achieved the high\u00ader over\u00adall score due to the con\u00adcep\u00adtu\u00adal eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion. The appli\u00adcant object\u00aded to this deci\u00adsion with ref\u00ader\u00adence to seri\u00adous irreg\u00adu\u00adlar\u00adi\u00adties in the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion of its con\u00adcepts. In par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar, it object\u00aded to a lack of com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty, improp\u00ader con\u00adsid\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtions and a breach of the prin\u00adci\u00adple of equal treat\u00adment. The appli\u00adca\u00adtion for review led to the par\u00adtial annul\u00adment of the award deci\u00adsion by the Ans\u00adbach pro\u00adcure\u00adment cham\u00adber (ref. RMF-SG21-3194\u20139\u201132). The hos\u00adpi\u00adtal filed an appeal against the deci\u00adsion of the award\u00ading cham\u00adber, the appli\u00adcant also filed a cross-appeal, as the award\u00ading cham\u00adber had not made a deci\u00adsion on two fur\u00adther con\u00adcept eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtions, where\u00adupon the Bay\u00adObLG (Az. Verg 8\/24 e) was seized with the case.       <\/p>\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Deci\u00adsion of the court<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The deci\u00adsion of the Bay\u00adObLG clar\u00adi\u00adfies that qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive award cri\u00adte\u00adria do not open up a legal vac\u00adu\u00adum. Even where cre\u00adative, con\u00adcep\u00adtu\u00adal or strate\u00adgic con\u00adtri\u00adbu\u00adtions are required, eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtions must be trans\u00adpar\u00adent, con\u00adsis\u00adtent and based on objec\u00adtive\u00adly viable con\u00adsid\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtions. A broad scope for assess\u00adment does not release the award\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adty from its duty to com\u00adply with the basic prin\u00adci\u00adples of pub\u00adlic pro\u00adcure\u00adment law.    <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This became par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar\u00adly clear in the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion cri\u00adte\u00adri\u00adon \u201creim\u00adburse\u00adment\u201d: The award\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adty had defined in the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion matrix that prompt reim\u00adburse\u00adment was to be eval\u00adu\u00adat\u00aded pos\u00adi\u00adtive\u00adly \u2014 an aspect that was ful\u00adly met by the appli\u00adcan\u00adt\u2019s bid. Nev\u00ader\u00adthe\u00adless, the appli\u00adcant received a low\u00ader rat\u00ading on this point with\u00adout this being clear\u00adly doc\u00adu\u00adment\u00aded. The court judged this to be a clear breach of the self-imposed eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion require\u00adments.    <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The deci\u00adsion also crit\u00adi\u00adcized the fact that some of the aspects includ\u00aded in the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion had not been dis\u00adclosed as require\u00adments in the ten\u00adder doc\u00adu\u00adments. In oth\u00ader cas\u00ades, the appli\u00adcan\u00adt\u2019s cor\u00adrect infor\u00adma\u00adtion was deval\u00adued even though it objec\u00adtive\u00adly ful\u00adfilled the required con\u00adtent \u2014 for exam\u00adple in the areas of dig\u00adi\u00adtal\u00adiza\u00adtion, train\u00ading and plan\u00adning to safe\u00adguard sup\u00adply chains in cri\u00adsis sit\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtions.   <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Bay\u00adObLG empha\u00adsized that a com\u00adpar\u00ada\u00adtive assess\u00adment may not lead to dif\u00adfer\u00adent points being award\u00aded if the sub\u00adstan\u00adtive per\u00adfor\u00admance is equiv\u00ada\u00adlent. A devi\u00ada\u00adtion that is not objec\u00adtive\u00adly jus\u00adti\u00adfied vio\u00adlates the prin\u00adci\u00adples of trans\u00adparen\u00adcy and equal treat\u00adment. The award\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adty was there\u00adfore oblig\u00aded to reset the award pro\u00adce\u00addure to the sta\u00adtus pri\u00ador to the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion of the ten\u00adders and to com\u00adplete\u00adly re-eval\u00adu\u00adate con\u00adcepts no. 1, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.7, 3.8, 4, 5 as well as 6.1 and 6.2. The pro\u00adceed\u00adings were then to be con\u00adtin\u00adued in accor\u00addance with the court\u2019s legal opin\u00adion.     <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Legal\u00adi\u00adty of the val\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Bay\u00adObLG found that the ten\u00adder eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion was in breach of pub\u00adlic pro\u00adcure\u00adment law in sev\u00ader\u00adal key points. In par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar, the devi\u00ada\u00adtion from the com\u00adpa\u00adny\u2019s own eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion spec\u00adi\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtions and the inad\u00ade\u00adquate doc\u00adu\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion led to the objec\u00adtion. The Sen\u00adate empha\u00adsized that a con\u00adsis\u00adtent and com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adble eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion is not a mere for\u00admal\u00adi\u00adty, but a legal\u00adly required pre\u00adreq\u00adui\u00adsite for a prop\u00ader award pro\u00adce\u00addure \u2014 espe\u00adcial\u00adly when eval\u00adu\u00adat\u00ading qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive award cri\u00adte\u00adria.    <\/p>\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Con\u00adclu\u00adsion<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Bay\u00adObLG\u2019s deci\u00adsion illus\u00adtrates the great impor\u00adtance of a struc\u00adtured and legal\u00adly com\u00adpli\u00adant eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion method\u00adol\u00ado\u00adgy \u2014 espe\u00adcial\u00adly for ten\u00adders in which qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive con\u00adcepts are deci\u00adsive. Pub\u00adlic con\u00adtract\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adties must adhere to the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion stan\u00addards they have set them\u00adselves and apply them con\u00adsis\u00adtent\u00adly. A devi\u00adat\u00ading eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion of equiv\u00ada\u00adlent con\u00adtent with\u00adout objec\u00adtive jus\u00adti\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtion is inad\u00admis\u00adsi\u00adble.    <\/p>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In addi\u00adtion, every val\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion must be ade\u00adquate\u00adly doc\u00adu\u00adment\u00aded. Doc\u00adu\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion is not only impor\u00adtant inter\u00adnal\u00adly, but also forms the cen\u00adtral basis for court-proof trace\u00adabil\u00adi\u00adty in the event of a dis\u00adpute. Where the qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive com\u00adpo\u00adnent is high, the risk of sub\u00adjec\u00adtive mis\u00adjudge\u00adments increas\u00ades \u2014 mak\u00ading struc\u00adtured process\u00ades and, if nec\u00ades\u00adsary, exter\u00adnal sup\u00adport for qual\u00adi\u00adty assur\u00adance all the more impor\u00adtant.    <\/p>\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Infor\u00adma\u00adtion for con\u00adtract\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adties<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The deci\u00adsion clar\u00adi\u00adfies the legal require\u00adments for the design and imple\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion of eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion pro\u00adce\u00addures in the con\u00adtext of func\u00adtion\u00adal ten\u00adders:  <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Bind\u00ading nature of the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion stan\u00addards<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In the con\u00adtext of func\u00adtion\u00adal ten\u00adders, the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion stan\u00addards set by the award\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adty itself \u2014 for exam\u00adple in an eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion matrix \u2014 are bind\u00ading. If these stan\u00addards are sub\u00adse\u00adquent\u00adly rel\u00ada\u00adtivized or replaced by cri\u00adte\u00adria that have not been com\u00admu\u00adni\u00adcat\u00aded, this vio\u00adlates the prin\u00adci\u00adples of trans\u00adparen\u00adcy and equal treat\u00adment. The award\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adty is bound by its own spec\u00adi\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtions and may not change them arbi\u00adtrar\u00adi\u00adly.    <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Need for con\u00adsis\u00adten\u00adcy in the assess\u00adment<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Com\u00adpa\u00adra\u00adble ser\u00advices must also be treat\u00aded com\u00adpa\u00adra\u00adbly in the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion process. If eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtions dif\u00adfer from one anoth\u00ader, even though the ten\u00adders do not dif\u00adfer in terms of the rel\u00ade\u00advant char\u00adac\u00adter\u00adis\u00adtics, this must be doc\u00adu\u00adment\u00aded in a tech\u00adni\u00adcal\u00adly sound and com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adble man\u00adner. A con\u00adsis\u00adtent eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion prac\u00adtice pro\u00adtects against arbi\u00adtrari\u00adness and ensures equal treat\u00adment of all bid\u00adders.    <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Doc\u00adu\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion as a legal oblig\u00ada\u00adtion<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Doc\u00adu\u00adment\u00ading the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion process is not a vol\u00adun\u00adtary mea\u00adsure, but a manda\u00adto\u00adry legal require\u00adment \u2014 espe\u00adcial\u00adly when eval\u00adu\u00adat\u00ading qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive cri\u00adte\u00adria. As such eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtions are often case-spe\u00adcif\u00adic and dis\u00adcre\u00adtionary, the basis of the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion and the award\u00ading of points must be doc\u00adu\u00adment\u00aded in a detailed and com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adble man\u00adner. This also results from Sec\u00adtion 8 VgV, which requires com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsive doc\u00adu\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion.    <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Ensure trace\u00adabil\u00adi\u00adty for third par\u00adties<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty of the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion is not only impor\u00adtant for unsuc\u00adcess\u00adful bid\u00adders, but also for the bod\u00adies involved in review\u00ading the award pro\u00adce\u00addure in a pos\u00adsi\u00adble review pro\u00adce\u00addure. Gen\u00ader\u00adal state\u00adments or for\u00admu\u00adla\u00adic jus\u00adti\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtions are not suf\u00adfi\u00adcient. Rather, con\u00adcrete and trans\u00adpar\u00adent expla\u00adna\u00adtions of the basis for the deci\u00adsion are required.    <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Strength\u00aden\u00ading inter\u00adnal qual\u00adi\u00adty assur\u00adance<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For ten\u00adders in which qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive cri\u00adte\u00adria play a cen\u00adtral role, the award\u00ading author\u00adi\u00adty should crit\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly scru\u00adti\u00adnize its inter\u00adnal eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion process\u00ades. Struc\u00adtured qual\u00adi\u00adty assur\u00adance can help to avoid eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion errors. If nec\u00ades\u00adsary, exter\u00adnal sup\u00adport can also be use\u00adful in order to increase the objec\u00adtiv\u00adi\u00adty and reli\u00ada\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty of the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtions.    <\/p>\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Notes for bid\u00adders  <\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The deci\u00adsion also con\u00adtains valu\u00adable infor\u00adma\u00adtion for bid\u00adders and fund\u00ading recip\u00adi\u00adents on strate\u00adgic posi\u00adtion\u00ading in the award pro\u00adce\u00addure:  <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Ear\u00adly com\u00adplaint to secure rights<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Bid\u00adders should care\u00adful\u00adly check whether a com\u00adplaint is nec\u00ades\u00adsary at the first signs of dis\u00adcrep\u00adan\u00adcies in the pre\u00adlim\u00adi\u00adnary infor\u00adma\u00adtion. Even if con\u00adcrete eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion errors are often not yet rec\u00adog\u00adniz\u00adable at this point, it may be suf\u00adfi\u00adcient to point out an insuf\u00adfi\u00adcient or unclear jus\u00adti\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtion. The pre\u00adreq\u00adui\u00adsite is that the com\u00adplaint must indi\u00adcate the rec\u00adog\u00adniz\u00adable con\u00adtent of the objec\u00adtion. An ear\u00adly, fac\u00adtu\u00adal\u00adly sub\u00adstan\u00adti\u00adat\u00aded com\u00adplaint can be deci\u00adsive in gain\u00ading access to the review pro\u00adce\u00addure at a lat\u00ader stage \u2014 how\u00adev\u00ader, wild or blan\u00adket com\u00adplaints should be avoid\u00aded.     <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Tar\u00adget\u00aded use of file access<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The deci\u00adsion clar\u00adi\u00adfies that infor\u00adma\u00adtion that only becomes known dur\u00ading the inspec\u00adtion of files may be sub\u00adse\u00adquent\u00adly intro\u00adduced into a review pro\u00adce\u00addure. This allows bid\u00adders to base their objec\u00adtions on a well-found\u00aded basis and tar\u00adget fur\u00adther action \u2014 with\u00adout the risk of preclu\u00adsion, pro\u00advid\u00aded that the orig\u00adi\u00adnal objec\u00adtion accu\u00adrate\u00adly reflects the infor\u00adma\u00adtion sit\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion.   <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Con\u00adcept pre\u00adsen\u00adta\u00adtion with pre\u00adci\u00adsion<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The deci\u00adsion does not explic\u00adit\u00adly com\u00adment on the form of the con\u00adcept pre\u00adsen\u00adta\u00adtion. Nev\u00ader\u00adthe\u00adless, the pro\u00adce\u00addure shows that a clear and struc\u00adtured elab\u00ado\u00adra\u00adtion can be help\u00adful, espe\u00adcial\u00adly in func\u00adtion\u00adal ten\u00adders with scope for eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion \u2014 both for the com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty of the eval\u00adu\u00ada\u00adtion and for its legal com\u00adpre\u00adhen\u00adsi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty in the review pro\u00adce\u00addure.   <\/p>\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Demand equal treat\u00adment<\/strong> <\/h3>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If con\u00adtent of com\u00adpa\u00adra\u00adble val\u00adue has been rat\u00aded dif\u00adfer\u00adent\u00adly, it is advis\u00adable to ques\u00adtion this crit\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly. The stan\u00addards of equal treat\u00adment also apply to qual\u00adi\u00adta\u00adtive assess\u00adments. A dif\u00adfer\u00aden\u00adti\u00adat\u00aded assess\u00adment may not be accept\u00aded with\u00adout a con\u00adclu\u00adsive and doc\u00adu\u00adment\u00aded jus\u00adti\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtion.    <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>On June 13, 2025, our lawyer Anne Grahl dealt with the deci\u00adsion of the Bavar\u00adi\u00adan Supreme Court of May 7, 2025 (Ref.: Verg 8\/24) in an abante live on pub\u00adlic pro\u00adcure\u00adment law. The Bavar\u00adi\u00adan Supreme Court has made an insight\u00adful deci\u00adsion that focus\u00ades on a fre\u00adquent\u00adly dis\u00adcussed top\u00adic in pub\u00adlic pro\u00adcure\u00adment law: the require\u00adments for [\u2026]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":28,"featured_media":20784,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"wp_typography_post_enhancements_disabled":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[743,720,703,248,1],"tags":[745,746,749,747,748,744],"team_kategorien":[],"lexikon_kategorie":[223,206],"class_list":["post-23252","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-bidders-and-applicants","category-client","category-current-public-procurement-law-in-15-minutes","category-jurisdiction","category-unkategorisiert","tag-documentation-of-the-evaluation","tag-duties-award-procedure","tag-healthcare","tag-invitation-to-tender","tag-open-procedure","tag-qualitative-award-criteria","lexikon_kategorie-review-procedure","lexikon_kategorie-suitability-criteria"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23252","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/28"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=23252"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23252\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":23254,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23252\/revisions\/23254"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/20784"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23252"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23252"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23252"},{"taxonomy":"team_kategorien","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/team_kategorien?post=23252"},{"taxonomy":"lexikon_kategorie","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abante.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/lexikon_kategorie?post=23252"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}