The Georgian Competition and Consumer Agency (GCCA) has adopted a decision declaring inadmissible a complaint submitted by LLC "Megamsheni".
The case concerned a review, under Article 10 of the Law of Georgia on Competition, of tender conditions established by the municipalities of Khashuri, Gurjaani, Senaki, Lagodekhi, Terjola, and Borjomi, in connection with the possible restriction of competition by state administrative bodies.
According to the complaint, LLC "Megamsheni", a Class A inspection body, submitted that the tender conditions announced by the above municipalities in 2026 extended the scope of procurement beyond supervisory services for construction works to encompass supervisory services for design and cost-estimate documentation. Bidders were accordingly required to hold, in addition to the accreditation necessary for construction supervision, further accreditation across various fields of inspection of design and cost-estimate documentation.
Having examined the matter, the GCCA found that requirements set out in tender documentation must derive from a legitimate purpose, adequately reflect the procuring entity's needs, and, at the same time, ensure a proportionate and non-discriminatory approach toward potential suppliers capable of meeting that need.
On this basis, the Agency concluded that there were no reasonable grounds, within the scope of the present case, to suspect that the tender conditions imposed by the respondent municipal bodies, in the exercise of their discretionary authority, prohibited, suspended, or otherwise impeded the economic activity or independence of the complainant undertaking. In particular, the disputed provision could not be regarded as discriminatory on the sole ground that it limited the complainant undertaking's participation in the tender, given that the undertaking did not hold accreditation covering all fields required by the tender documentation. At the same time, the Agency found that the complainant undertaking was not precluded from participating in the electronic tender announced under the disputed conditions, having regard to the possibility of engaging a subcontractor with a view to jointly satisfying the accreditation requirements across all fields specified in the tender documentation.
In light of the above, there is no reasonable suspicion of an infringement of Article 10 of the Law of Georgia on Competition, and the initiation of an investigation was not deemed appropriate.
