{"id":5728,"date":"2019-06-25T10:28:37","date_gmt":"2019-06-25T07:28:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/%cf%87%cf%89%cf%81%ce%af%cf%82-%ce%ba%ce%b1%cf%84%ce%b7%ce%b3%ce%bf%cf%81%ce%af%ce%b1\/pre-litigation-action-brought-by-ergotrak-in-the-context-of-a-public-procurement-tender\/"},"modified":"2019-06-25T10:28:37","modified_gmt":"2019-06-25T07:28:37","slug":"pre-litigation-action-brought-by-ergotrak-in-the-context-of-a-public-procurement-tender","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/cases\/pre-litigation-action-brought-by-ergotrak-in-the-context-of-a-public-procurement-tender\/","title":{"rendered":"Pre-litigation Action brought by Ergotrak in the context of a public procurement tender."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>25.6.2019 &#8211; The Law Firm &#8220;Spilios Spiliopoulos and Partners&#8221; drafts and files on behalf of the company ERGOTRAK a preliminary appeal before the Authority for the Examination of Preliminary Objections (AEPP) against the decision of DEYA SYMIS.<\/p>\n<p>In particular, DEYA SYMES, in a tender procedure announced for the supply of a tanker, accepted, inter alia, the offer of a company which did not meet the technical requirements of the tender, for which reason ERGOTRAK brought a preliminary appeal, before the Authority for the Examination of Preliminary Objections (AEPP), requesting the annulment of the decision of DEYA SYMES, in so far as it accepted the participation of the opposing bidder which did not meet the technical specifications of the tender.<\/p>\n<p>By its decision No 765\/2019, the Authority for the Examination of Preliminary Objections (AEPP) accepted in its entirety the preliminary appeal brought by ERGOTRAK, annulling the decision of the contracting authority, in so far as it accepted the tender of a tenderer which did not have the required technical capacity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>25.6.2019 &#8211; The Law Firm &#8220;Spilios Spiliopoulos and Partners&#8221; drafts and files on behalf of the company ERGOTRAK a preliminary appeal before the Authority for the Examination of Preli<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"pgc_meta":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[525],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5728","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cases"],"rttpg_featured_image_url":null,"rttpg_author":{"display_name":"spiliopouloslaw","author_link":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/author\/root2christos\/"},"rttpg_comment":0,"rttpg_category":"<a href=\"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/category\/cases\/\" rel=\"category tag\">CASES<\/a>","rttpg_excerpt":"25.6.2019 - The Law Firm \"Spilios Spiliopoulos and Partners\" drafts and files on behalf of the company ERGOTRAK a preliminary appeal before the Authority for the Examination of Preli","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5728","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5728"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5728\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5728"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5728"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.spiliopouloslaw.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5728"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}