Development of construction design documentation and author supervision services

This tender for construction design and supervision services demonstrates good structural elements and EU funding, but is significantly hampered by restricted document access and inconsistencies regarding key procedural details.

The tender defines an open procedure, assigns an appropriate CPV code, and indicates EU funding, suggesting adherence to broader regulations. However, the flagged 'Restricted document access' is a significant concern for legal compliance, particularly regarding transparency and equal treatment principles.

The tender's title and description are clear, and requirements are structured by referring to specific documents. However, the contradiction between the 'No evaluation criteria specified' flag and their mention in document summaries indicates a potential lack of central, unambiguous clarity.

Basic information, financial details, timeline, and location are well-populated. While documents are listed, the 'Restricted document access' and the flagged absence of clearly specified evaluation criteria reduce the practical completeness for potential bidders.

Fairness is significantly compromised by the 'Restricted document access,' which directly hinders equal access to information. The flagged absence of clearly specified evaluation criteria and the contradiction regarding e-submission also detract from transparency and equal opportunity.

The practicality is affected by the contradiction between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission,' creating uncertainty for bidders. While contract duration and financing are clear, the lack of an explicit document URL and the 'Restricted document access' reduce ease of participation.

The tender exhibits notable inconsistencies, particularly the contradiction between the 'No evaluation criteria specified' flag and their mention in document summaries, and the conflicting information regarding e-submission functionality.

While the project is EU Funded, which often implies adherence to broader EU standards, the tender lacks explicit criteria for green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus.