Decisions on procurement law

Much of procurement law is not found in the statute but in decisions of the public procurement tribunals (Vergabekammern) and the higher regional courts. Here we collect decisions that make a practical difference for bidding companies, with case number and key holding.

The standard we use for selection

A decision is included if it clarifies a question that actually arises in the tender phase and if the case number allows it to be verified. We state the key holding and indicate whether case law is inconsistent. A single decision of a higher regional court does not bind other senates.

An example that is often underestimated

Case law is inconsistent on whether a bidding consortium may be restructured after tenders have been submitted. The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg ruled that a member switching to the role of subcontractor leads to exclusion (1 Verg 4/13). Other senates assess changes less formally. Relying on the more lenient line means taking a risk that can be avoided. More on this in the article on bidding consortia.

This section is growing

We build the collection around the questions we receive. If you are looking for a reliable assessment on a particular point, let us know.