Brazilian Public Administration: Bidding and Contracts
Question: Can an act of direct federal public administration, which granted the right to retire in 2000, be repealed in 2007 due to an allegation of illegality?
Answer: No, because according to Article 54 of Law 9784/99, the deadline for such withdrawal expires in 5 years, and in the case presented, seven years have passed.
Question: The State of Rio Grande do Sul promoted expropriation in certain areas included in the Master Plan of County X, due to urban land being unbuilt, upon payment of public debt securities. Based on the constitutional text analysis, is this correct?
Answer: It is correct because, as per Article 182, paragraph 4 of the Federal Constitution, it has the power to promote such expropriation.
Question: Is it legal for the administration to publish an administrative requirement in the contract to provide security services if this requirement was not provided in the Invitation for Bid?
Answer: No, as per Article 56 of Law 8666/93, the provision of a guarantee may be required if stated in the Bidding Announcement.
Question: In Brazil, due to Federal Law 8666/93, is it forbidden to not require bidding for the procurement of which services?
Answer: Advertising and disclosure.
Question: Pursuant to Federal Law 8666/93, what are the status of bids, administrative contracts, bidding methods, kinds of bidding, and enforcement regimes?
Answer: Competition, lowest price, turnkey.
Question: Which alternative correctly states an exception to the duty to tender?
Answer: Inviability of competition.
Question: Under Law 8666/93, when is bidding dispensable?
Answer: When there is an inviability of competition.
Question: Regarding the legal status of bids, which statement is correct?
Answer: (B) The bid is intended not only to select the proposal most beneficial to the Administration but also to dispense isonomic treatment to those administered so that the Public Power can establish eligibility requirements, both technical and economical, to be met by the parties, since they expend a guarantee of effective enforcement of contractual obligations.
Question: About administrative contracts, which statement is correct?
Answer: (B) They may be modified bilaterally, that is, by permission of the Public Administration and the private contractor.
Question: In a bid in the form of price-taking, during the opening of envelopes with the documents necessary for the initial qualification, one of the companies involved had its Certificate of Good Standing (CND) expired just two days before the date set for opening proposals. Challenged by other participants, it was declared disqualified by the Tenders Board. Using a new CND, another was added whose term coincided with the date designated for the opening of tenders. According to Law 8666/93, which regulates rules for bidding and contracts of public administration, what should the action be?
Answer: (A) Improvisation regarding the principle of equality between the bidders.
Question: Law No. 8666/93, establishing the rules for bidding and procurement of Public Administration, states what?
Answer: (D) The economic and financial clauses of administrative contracts cannot be changed without prior agreement of the contract.
Question: After a regular competition and the consequent conclusion of a highway concession preceded by published work, the Public Administration concluded that, technically, there is a need to aggregate a given road network stretch further, by changing the location of a toll plaza. Can the authority change the object awarding the contract to include these changes?
Answer: (A) Yes, by the principle of mutability of administrative contracts, provided that the change is justified by public interest, does not deface the essence of the contract, and maintains its economic and financial balance.
Question: The occurrence of any tax or charge generally occurring after the date of submission of the proposal, which entails the possibility of price revision of the administrative contract in progress, helps to institute the following from the theory of unforeseen circumstances, according to Law 8666/93.
Answer: (A) Force Majeure.
Question: Northwind Correa, analyzing the writing of a particular bid, noted the requirement for a series of irregularities. Taking advantage of his status as a citizen, five working days before the due date for opening the envelopes, he filed a vast petition challenging the edict, showing, point by point, disobedience to the precepts contained in Law 8666/93. Looking at the conduct of Northwind Correa, which assertion is correct?
Answer: (A) The procedure has legal support, as any citizen has standing to challenge the bidding documents for irregularities in the implementation of Law 8666/93.
Question: A municipality needs to acquire sophisticated technical equipment supplied by only one company. In this case, what is the hypothesis?
Answer: (B) Bidding is not required.
Question: Mark the correct alternative on the grounds of Law 8666/93.
Answer: (B) Bidding is dispensable when no bidders appeared in the previous bidding, and this cannot justifiably be repeated without prejudice to the administration, maintaining the pre-established conditions.
Question: A Member of the Federation decided to hire specialized consulting services in the area of human resources to assess the state and public services, thereby subsidizing the adoption of guidelines for a policy of quality and productivity of services. The announcement of the event set, among others, the conditions for the qualification of bidders. After the publication of the announcement, the Administration decided on an internal announcement to bidders who submitted qualification documents, opening a new date for the completion of documents. It argued that the requirements originally established were not sufficient to ensure the technical quality required for visitors to qualify to compete in the Certamen. Based on this report, is this procedure correct or not, founded on the principles applicable to bidding?
Answer: It is incorrect because it violates Article 43, paragraph 3 of Law 8666/93 and violates the principle of linking the calling instrument because it changes what was written in the announcement. Once you ask for another document, knowing that the bidders may have to be, it benefits a competitor.
Question: A municipality in the state of Rio Grande do Sul has decided to open a bidding process for the purchase of computer equipment. The edict was issued by the secretary in a newspaper circulating in the municipality. Your company, interested in supplying the product object of the event, did not conform to irregularities therein. Given this, what measure could you take? Explain and cite the legal basis.
Answer: You could file a request for redress. The legal basis for such a measure is Article 41, paragraph 1 of Law 8666/93.
Question: The Municipal Mayor of City X, because of a public calamity decreed in this location, did not realize the bidding procedure to purchase needed products and emergencies for the population affected by a flood. At the end of the contract performed without previous bidding, the City Council decided to extend the contract by an amendment. Are the measures adopted by the council correct? Explain and cite the relevant legal provisions.
Answer: In the case of buying products without proper bidding, the Municipal Mayor acted properly because it is one of the situations in which the bidding is not required; it is an exceptional situation (Article 24, IV of Law 8666/93). In the case of the extension, the City acted incorrectly, as provided for in that article. It is forbidden to extend contracts made in cases of emergency or public calamity; the same should be signed for a maximum period of 180 consecutive days.