Baldų tiekimo pagrindų sutartis

This tender for furniture supply and installation is generally well-structured with clear basic information and a reasonable estimated value. However, it lacks specific details on evaluation criteria and submission requirements, impacting its completeness and practicality.

The tender adheres to general legal compliance by providing a clear procedure (open procedure), a relevant CPV code, and no reported disputes. The deadline, while potentially tight, is within a typical range for such procurements. The absence of a reveal date is a minor procedural oversight.

The description of the requirement for a multi-lot furniture framework is clear. However, the lack of specified evaluation criteria and detailed submission requirements leaves significant ambiguity for potential bidders regarding how their proposals will be assessed and what documentation is expected.

Key information such as title, reference, organization, estimated value, and contract duration are present. However, the absence of specific details regarding exclusion, eligibility, technical, financial, and submission requirements, as well as the lack of content in the tender documents, significantly reduces its completeness.

The tender is an open procedure, allowing broad access. The estimated value is disclosed, and the deadline, while potentially short, is not excessively so. The lack of specified evaluation criteria could be perceived as a fairness issue if it leads to subjective assessments, but the absence of company-specific tailoring is positive.

The tender specifies a contract start date and duration. However, the lack of information regarding e-submission, document URLs (beyond the count), and financing details limits its practicality for bidders. The absence of specific requirements also hinders practical preparation.

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated logically. There are no reported suspensions or disputes, contributing to high data consistency.

The tender does not explicitly mention green procurement, social aspects, innovation, or EU funding, indicating a lack of focus on these sustainability elements.