Proceeding in the National Appeals Chamber, although it has been greatly simplified, can still arouse a lot of controversy, or at least excitement. It has been five years since the publication of the series of three articles by Softtutor Consulting published in the ITwiz magazine, devoted to public procurement – analyzed from the perspective of contracting authority, contractors, and finally the National Appeals Chamber. It’s time to refresh this topic.

There is no doubt that proceeding in front of the Chamber is like a battle in which the ability of rhetoric and logical thinking is as important as objective truth. However, the problem may be that in public procurement it is sometimes difficult to talk about objective truth. In the article “KIO Verdicts – the unpredictability of disappointments” (magazine “ITwiz” 1/2015), we cited examples of the contractor’s negating the manufacturer’s statement or the use of conflicting opinions of experts in one case by each party.

The article presents cases from last year, including the history of the dispute about the RAID storage, in which the key role was taken by the expert appointed by the National Appeals Chamber, the use of the non-price criteria for assessing technological maturity based on the Gartner or Forrester Research reports, and also the ethics of conducting cases in the National Appeals Chamber.

Softtutor Consulting supports conducting dialogues and tender procedures for the purchase and implementation of comprehensive IT solutions.