Bid Challenges Sample Clauses

Bid Challenges. 1. Each Party shall provide non-discriminatory, timely, transparent and effective procedures enabling suppliers to challenge alleged breaches of any obligations specified in this Chapter for procurements in which they have, or have had, an interest. 2. Challenges shall be heard by an impartial and independent reviewing authority. A reviewing authority, if it is not a court, shall either be subject to judicial review or shall have procedural guarantees of due process. 3. Provided it respects the previous paragraphs, each Party can determine according to its domestic laws and regulations the review procedures applicable to the hearing of challenges under this Article. 4. Each Party shall allow sufficient period of time for suppliers to prepare and submit a challenge.
View SourceView Similar (10)
Bid Challenges. 1. Entities shall accord impartial and timely consideration to any complaints from suppliers regarding an alleged breach of this Chapter in the context of a procurement procedure. 2. Each Party shall provide non-discriminatory, timely, transparent and effective procedures enabling suppliers to challenge alleged breaches of this Chapter arising in the context of procurements in which they have, or have had, an interest. 3. Challenges shall be heard by an impartial and independent reviewing authority. A reviewing authority which is not a court shall either be subject to judicial review or shall have procedural guarantees similar to those of a court. 4. Challenge procedures shall provide for: (a) rapid interim measures to correct breaches of this Chapter and to preserve commercial opportunities. Such action may result in suspension of the procurement process. However, procedures may provide that overriding adverse consequences for the interests concerned, including the public interest, may be taken into account in deciding whether such measures should be applied; and (b) if appropriate, correction of the breach of this Chapter or, in the absence of such correction, compensation for the loss or damages suffered, which may be limited to costs for tender preparation and protest.
View SourceView Similar (5)
Bid Challenges. 1. Entities shall accord impartial and timely consideration to any complaints from suppliers regarding an alleged breach of this Chapter in the context of a procurement procedure. 2. Each Party shall provide non-discriminatory, timely, transparent and effective procedures enabling suppliers to challenge alleged breaches of this Chapter, arising in the context of procurements in which they have, or have had, an interest. 3. Challenges shall be heard by an impartial and independent reviewing authority. A reviewing authority which is not a court shall either be subject to judicial review or shall have procedural guarantees similar to those of a court. 4. Challenge procedures shall provide for, if appropriate, correction of the breach of this Chapter or, in the absence of such correction, compensation for the loss or damages suffered, which may be limited to costs for tender preparation and protest.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Bid Challenges. 1. Entities shall accord impartial and timely consideration to any complaints from suppliers regarding an alleged breach of this Chapter in the context of a procurement procedure. 2. Each Party shall provide non-discriminatory, timely, transparent and effective procedures enabling suppliers to challenge alleged breaches of this Chapter, arising in the context of procurements in which they have, or have had, an interest. 3 For the purpose of this Chapter, a technical regulation is a document, which lays down characteristics of a product or a service or their related processes and production methods, including the applicable administrative provisions, with which compliance is mandatory. It may also include or deal exclusively with terminology, symbols, packaging, marking or labelling requirements as they apply to a product, service, process or production method.‌
View SourceView Similar (2)
Bid Challenges. 1. The Parties and the Signatory CARIFORUM States shall provide transparent, timely, impartial and effective procedures enabling suppliers to challenge domestic measures implementing this Chapter in the context of procurements in which they have, or have had, a legitimate commercial interest. To this effect, each Party or Signatory CARIFORUM State shall establish, identify or designate at least one impartial administrative or judicial authority that is independent of its procuring entities to receive and review a challenge by a supplier arising in the context of covered procurement. 2. Each supplier shall be allowed a sufficient period of time to prepare and submit a challenge as from the time when the basis of the challenge become known or reasonably should have become known to the supplier. This paragraph does not preclude Parties or Signatory CARIFORUM States from requiring complainants to lodge their complaints within a reasonable period of time provided that duration of that period is made known in advance. 3. Procuring entities shall ensure their ability to respond to requests for a review by maintaining a reasonable record of each procurement covered under this Chapter. 4. Challenge procedures shall provide for effective rapid interim measures to correct breaches of the domestic measures implementing this Chapter.
View Source

Related to Bid Challenges

  • Challenges The Experts may be challenged by either Party if circumstances exist that give rise to justifiable doubts as to any of their impartiality or independence. In such circumstances the challenge shall be brought by written notice to the ICC copied to the other Party within fourteen (14) calendar days of the appointment of the relevant Expert or within fourteen (14) calendar days of the challenging Party becoming aware of the circumstances giving rise to the challenge. Unless the challenged Expert withdraws. or whichever of the Parties that has not brought the challenge agrees to the challenge, within fourteen (14) calendar days of the challenge, the ICC shall decide the challenge and, if appropriate, shall appoint a replacement Expert in accordance with the criteria set out herein.

  • No Challenges In no event shall any Secured Party take any action to challenge, contest or dispute the validity, extent, enforceability, or priority of the Collateral Agent’s Liens hereunder or under any other Security Document with respect to any of the Collateral, or that would have the effect of invalidating any such Lien or support any Person who takes any such action. Each of the Secured Parties agrees that it will not take any action to challenge, contest or dispute the validity, enforceability or secured status of any other Secured Party’s claims against any Obligor (other than any such claim resulting from a breach of this Agreement by a Secured Party, or any challenge, contest or dispute alleging arithmetical error in the determination of a claim), or that would have the effect of invalidating any such claim, or support any Person who takes any such action.

  • Challenge If Executive violates or challenges the enforceability of any provisions of the Restrictive Covenants or this Release, no further payments, rights or benefits under Section 5 of the Agreement will be due to Executive (except where such provision would be prohibited by applicable law, rule or regulation).

  • Patent Challenge 6.5.1 Licensor may terminate this Agreement, effective immediately upon written notice to Licensee, upon the commencement by Licensee or any of its Affiliates of a Patent Challenge. 6.5.2 Licensee shall include in each sublicense agreement entered into with a Sublicensee a right of Licensee to terminate such sublicense agreement if such Sublicensee commences a Patent Challenge; and Licensee shall terminate the sublicense agreement, effective immediately upon written notice to the Sublicensee, if the Sublicensee commences a Patent Challenge. In addition, if the Sublicensee’s commencement of a Patent Challenge gives Licensor’s licensor a right of termination under the Penn Agreement and such licensor threatens to terminate the Penn Agreement, then, upon receipt of notice to such effect, Licensor may terminate this Agreement, effective immediately upon written notice to Licensee, if the Sublicensee commences a Patent Challenge. 6.5.3 For purposes of this Section 6.5, “Patent Challenge” means any action against Licensor or the University of Pennsylvania or SmithKline ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Corporation (or their successors under the Existing Licenses), including an action for declaratory judgment, to declare or render invalid or unenforceable the Licensed Patents, or any claim thereof.

  • Third Party Proceedings The Company shall indemnify Indemnitee if Indemnitee is or was a party or is threatened to be made a party to any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative (other than an action by or in the right of the Company) by reason of the fact that Indemnitee is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of the Company, or any subsidiary of the Company, by reason of any action or inaction on the part of Indemnitee while an officer or director or by reason of the fact that Indemnitee is or was serving at the request of the Company as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, against expenses (including attorneys’ fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement (if such settlement is approved in advance by the Company, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld) actually and reasonably incurred by Indemnitee in connection with such action, suit or proceeding if Indemnitee acted in good faith and in a manner Indemnitee reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the Company, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe Indemnitee’s conduct was unlawful. The termination of any action, suit or proceeding by judgment, order, settlement, conviction, or upon a plea of nolo contendere or its equivalent, shall not, of itself, create a presumption that Indemnitee did not act in good faith and in a manner which Indemnitee reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the Company, or, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, that Indemnitee had reasonable cause to believe that Indemnitee’s conduct was unlawful.