Preventive maintenance and repair of Kardex equipment

This tender demonstrates good clarity and comprehensive documentation, but raises concerns regarding competition due to brand-specific requirements and the single-supplier framework, alongside a complete absence of sustainability considerations.

Deadlines are reasonable, the procedure type and CPV codes are clearly defined, and the use of ESPD and electronic submission aligns with EU/national regulations. While 'Negotiation Allowed' for an 'Open' procedure with a 100% price criterion is slightly unusual, it may be permissible under specific national rules. The single-supplier framework is also legally permissible.

The tender description is precise, requirements are well-documented and easy to understand, and evaluation criteria are explicitly stated as 100% price. The draft framework agreement clearly outlines performance conditions, contributing to excellent overall clarity.

All essential basic information, financial details, and timeline elements are provided. The tender documents are comprehensive, including forms and a draft contract. A minor inconsistency exists with 'Value Classified: Yes' despite the estimated value being publicly disclosed.

Full document access and electronic submission promote equal access, and evaluation criteria are objective. However, the requirement for specific 'Kardex REMstar' equipment maintenance inherently limits the supplier pool. Furthermore, the 'Max Participants: 1' for a framework agreement restricts future competition, impacting long-term fairness.

Electronic submission is supported, and the contract start date and duration are clearly specified. While a direct document URL isn't explicitly provided, the e-procurement portal link is available. More explicit financing details beyond the estimated value would enhance practicality.

Key fields are populated, and dates are logical and consistent. Minor inconsistencies include the 'Value Classified' flag and the 'Negotiation Allowed' characteristic in an otherwise straightforward open procedure, but these do not severely impact understanding.

The tender lacks any explicit mention or integration of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus, indicating a missed opportunity for sustainable public procurement practices.