Caselaw

Administrative Petition (Jerusalem) 65567-06-23 Nahor Netivei Transportation Ltd. v. Ministry of Transport and Road Safety - part 14

April 16, 2026
Print

(Appendix 18 to the petition).

This is also written in the disqualification letter sent to Nahor, and the wording of which was approved by the tenders committee:

"Although Nahor treated the process "seriously and seriously, since this is a cluster to which she attaches considerable importance, and accordingly Nahor invested considerable resources in order to prepare her proposal" (quotation from the committee's letter to the tenders committee – A.R.) She was not meticulous and meticulous in fulfilling the provisions of the proceeding and not on examining her proposal, all the more so when it comes to the financial proposal in her case, the bidder, as well as the committee, must be very careful.

...

A cornerstone of tender law is the duty of a bidder to strictly comply with the provisions of the tender or the competitive procedure.  This is certainly the case, and especially with regard to the financial offer, which is at the heart of the proposal, and whose importance is reflected in the competitive process with a score of 52 points."

(Appendix 19 to the petition).

The approach of the tenders committee, although the Petitioner considers it too rigid, is well consistent with the case law that states that:

"The theory of tenders is good for the Beit Shammai approach.  There is no escape.  Strict and meticulous observance of clear and uniform rules is a guarantee for the maintenance of the essential principles of equality and fairness of the tender, for increasing public confidence in the tender method, for an effort to close the doors of corruption and for a change in the lenient attitude, at times, in the tender requirements on the part of some of the bidders.  Another approach may benefit the public coffers in some cases in the short term, but it will be harmed by the deterioration of virtue in the long term, and with it all the sickness involved.

(Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 5853/05 Kaldi Brothers in Tax Appeal v. Israel Railways in Tax Appeal [Published in Nevo] (January 16, 2007) in paragraph 14 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice E. Rubinstein).

Previous part1...1314
1516Next part