Reconstruction de routes – construction de chemins piétonniers le long des routes de district dans la zone de la commune de Dynów, de la commune de Hyżne et de la commune de Lubenia - 3 tâches

This tender for road construction in Poland is generally well-structured, with clear documentation and a reasonable CPV code. However, it lacks crucial details regarding evaluation criteria, financial information, and specific eligibility requirements, impacting its completeness and fairness.

The tender adheres to basic legal requirements with a proper CPV code and a specified deadline. However, the absence of explicit mention of regulatory compliance and the potential for a short submission window (depending on local regulations) are minor concerns. The lack of dispute information is positive.

The title and description clearly outline the scope of work: pedestrian path construction in specific municipalities. The CPV code is precise. However, the lack of specified evaluation criteria and detailed requirements within the provided text reduces overall clarity.

Basic information such as title, organization, and deadline is present. The CPV code and location are specified. However, critical financial information (estimated value) is not disclosed, and detailed eligibility, technical, and financial requirements are missing from the provided text, significantly impacting completeness.

The tender utilizes e-procurement, which promotes fairness. The CPV code is standard. However, the absence of disclosed estimated value and the lack of specified objective evaluation criteria could potentially lead to less transparent competition. The deadline, while present, might be considered short.

The tender is marked as 'E-Procurement', suggesting electronic submission. A contract start date and duration are not specified, which hinders practical planning for bidders. Financing information is also absent.

Key fields like title, organization, and deadline are populated. The CPV code is consistent with the description. There are no indications of suspension or disputes. The dates provided are logical.

There is no explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation within the provided tender information. This suggests a lack of focus on sustainability criteria.