Legal Remedies and Dispute Resolution in Public Procurement

A dispute resolution request is worth submitting when the tenderer or the contracting authority identifies a legal infringement or procedural issue that can be clarified before initiating a formal remedy procedure. This may include, for example, contradictory documentation or formal deficiencies that can be corrected through proper consultation.

In theory, a remedy procedure can be initiated without legal representation, but in practice this carries significant risk. Without precise knowledge of the legal and procedural rules, there is a substantial risk that the application will be rejected on formal or substantive grounds.

The Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság rejects the application without a substantive review if a mandatory content element under Section 149 of the Kbt. is missing. Recurring grounds include a mere paraphrase of the infringed provision instead of an itemised identification, missing proof of the applicant's legal interest, an awareness date without objective supporting facts, and non-payment of the administrative service fee by the time of submission.

The costs of a remedy procedure include the procedural fee, any legal representation fees, and expert costs related to preparation. These amounts can vary significantly depending on the complexity and scope of the case.

The fee is tiered by the estimated value of the procurement, with the schedule set out in the annex to Ministry of Justice Decree 45/2024 (XII. 31.). If the application challenges the invitation initiating the procedure or the procurement documents, the fee is 50% of the standard amount, but no less than HUF 300,000. Where a pre-litigation dispute resolution attempt was unsuccessful, the fee is further reduced by 20%.

Filing a remedy application does not in itself suspend the procurement procedure. The Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság may, however, order a contract-signing moratorium or suspend the procedure as an interim measure, ex officio or on request, typically until the substantive decision. The Döntőbizottság is a first-instance administrative unit of the Közbeszerzési Hatóság, with jurisdiction over conduct contrary to the Kbt. and its implementing decrees.

The 15-day subjective deadline runs from the day of becoming aware of the infringement, which must be supported by objective facts in the application. Evidence can include the date of the bid-opening minutes, the contracting authority's notice, or the timestamp of an EKR message. Uncertainty about the awareness date shifts the burden of proof to the applicant and is a recurring ground for rejection in Döntőbizottság practice.

During the judicial recess the deadline does not pause, but the Közbeszerzési Döntőbizottság does not carry out substantive proceedings. This is set out in the Közbeszerzési Hatóság's annual notice. The application must be filed on the merits by the last working day before the recess. Because the deadlines are peremptory, missing them cannot be cured by a separate application for restitution.