<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>

<!-- Mambo Open Source 4.5 RSS Generator Version 2.07 (12/10/2003) - Robert Castley -->
<!-- Changed for use with fireboard (10/04/2004) -->
<!-- Copyright (C) 2000-2003 - Procurement Law Academic Network -->
<rss version = "0.91">
    <channel>
        <title>Procurement Law Academic Network - Forum</title>

        <link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main</link>

        <description>
com_fireboard        </description>

        <language>
            en-us
        </language>

        <lastBuildDate>
            Fri, 24 May 2013 05:18:38 +0100        </lastBuildDate>

        

        <item><title>Subject: MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS. - by: Francisco Javier Vázquez Matilla</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=22&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>I would like to know whether amendments to public contracts has created problems in the legislation of different states.
In Spain there have been other problems. In fact just issued a new regulation in this area to regulate a restrictive regime of contract modifications.
What limits does the law of your state? What changes are considered substantial?
thank everyone in advance. Fco Javier Vázquez Matilla
j.vazquez@pamplona.es...</description>
</item>
<item><title>Subject: Staffing? How it happenes? - by: Dmitri Lee</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=21&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>Hello,

I was wondering if there is any studying about the formation of the staff for implementing any project. I would be very thankful if anyone can give me some ideas about the concept of formation the project implementation uni or similar teams. What are the main principles and criteria? Or if you know any studying about that, I would be also happy to have some links.

Thank you,...</description>
</item>
<item><title>Subject: Public Procurement Goals: Unison or Discord - by: Youssef Saad</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=20&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>Dear Colleagues,

I am launching a research on the possibility of achieving convergence in public procurement goals (that some may classify as primary and secondary) and the mechanism of a PP framework that integrates and streamlines all such goals with no or minimal conflict (should this be feasible).

In this respect, I would sincerely appreciate your views and opinions, namely on the following fronts:

1- what are the goals/objectives of public procurement?
2- what are the corresponding constraint...</description>
</item>
<item><title>Subject: Re:Article 296 EC - by: Youssef Saad</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=18&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>Hi, an interesting topic indeed.

I would analyze thsi case as follows:

General:
- Defense Procurement is &quot;special&quot; because of security concerns.
- Security involves technology security and intelligence (e.g. knowing how many KC-10's the MoD has is also a serious issue)

Procurement:
- if the KC-10 has rivals who are just as acceptable and
- if the KC-10 is procured raw and then modified through another contract
- then, MoD can conduct a competitive dialogue or negotiation with the rivals to ens...</description>
</item>
<item><title>Subject: Re:Framework Agreements - by: Youssef Saad</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=17&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>Hi,

I guess that framework contracts have always been limited in duration... (now, 4 years). As per EC terms, &quot;framework&quot; contract procedure does not automatically yield a contract. after public consultations and internal evaluations, this process yields a set of shortlisted firms in each of several domains or lots. Specific procurement requirements during the course of this frramework process will be sent to a number of those firms to submit particular prices, profiles, etc...

Hence, the limitation o...</description>
</item>
<item><title>Subject: Re:Framework Agreements - by: Mari Ann Simovart</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=14&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>Hello. 

This is just a quick thought and actually not directly related to framework contracts :) but see what the ECJ has said in Pressetext: &quot;the practice of concluding a public services contract for an indefinite period is in itself at odds with the scheme and purpose of the Community rules governing public contracts ...&quot; (C-454/06)

A unreasonably too long contract term probably would bring about the same &quot;dangers&quot; as an indefinite one. So - as I said - no direct applicability here, but may be there...</description>
</item>
<item><title>Subject: Framework Agreements - by: Baudouin Heuninckx</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=10&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>The EC Public Sector Directive (2004/18/EC) defines a framework agreement as &quot;an agreement between one or more contracting authorities and one or more economic operators, the purpose of which is to establish the terms governing contracts to be awarded during a given period, in particular with regard to price and, where appropriate, the quantity envisaged.&quot; The Directive (Article 32) further specifies that a framework agreement should not have a duration of more than four years. 

I was under the impressio...</description>
</item>
<item><title>Subject: Article 296 EC - by: Baudouin Heuninckx</title>
<link>http://www.planpublicprocurement.org/main/index.php?option=com_fireboard&amp;Itemid=76&amp;func=view&amp;id=9&amp;catid=12</link>
<description>I would like to submit a question for discussion related to Article 296(1)(b) of the EC Treaty. As you know, this article states: 

 Any Member State may take such measures as it considers necessary for the protection of the essential interests of its security which are connected with the production of or trade in arms, munitions and war material; such measures shall not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the common market regarding products which are not intended for specifically military ...</description>
</item>
    </channel>
</rss>