Innovation Partnership Agreement

Only those who are invited can participate in the process and submit research and innovation projects. The LexisPSL Local Government Team presents a new procedure created as part of the 2015 Public Contracts Regulations – the Innovation Partnership Process. The innovation partnership procedure stems from the Public Procurement Directive, i.e. the European Parliament/EU Directive 2014/24/EU of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing the 2004/18/EC Directive. The Public Procurement Directive (as it is typically called) refers to it as the „Public Procurement Directive“. A public sector buyer may opt for an innovation partnership if there are no finished solutions on the market to meet the needs of the contracting power, i.e. if something new is needed. The objective of innovation can vary considerably from one purchase project to another. For example, the innovation partnership could be used to develop robotics or artificial intelligence solutions for wellness services, or to seek new solutions for energy efficiency and building comfort. So far, innovation-sensitive public buyers in Finland have been caught between a rock and a difficult place. Purchasing rules did not allow cooperation with private companies for product development to result in a finished commercial product or the purchase of a service directly from the partner company. Many projects were stifled before they could leave.

Your organization will not disclose confidential information provided by a party without its explicit consent. This authorization can only be granted by reference to the intention to transmit certain information. After each step, you have the opportunity to end the partnership or reduce the number of partners. You can terminate individual contracts by applying the award criteria, as long as you have indicated such opportunities in the purchase documents. An adjudicator`s authority must also pay attention to confidential information. The 2015 PCR, reg 31 (16), stipulates that the contracting authorities cannot disclose confidential information to other bidders provided by a bidder participating in the negotiations without the consent of the bidder. An adjudicating authority must not circumvent this obligation by allowing bidders to sign a general waiver (PCR 2015, reg 31 (17)). It is important that an adjudicator power is also aware of its obligations under the right to freedom of information. In addition, in the case of an innovation partnership with several partners, an adjudicator authority is required to retain confidential solutions or other confidential information proposed by a partner as part of the partnership, unless the partner has the permission of that partner to do something else (PCR 2015, reg 31(23)).

Again, an adjudicator`s authority must not circumvent this obligation by allowing bidders to sign a general waiver (PCR 2015, reg 31 (24)). Regulation 72 now provides for the possibility of modifying contracts during their lifetime. It does not contain any special exceptions for „innovation partnerships.“ Therefore, it appears that all changes made over the life of the partnership must be covered by the amendments authorized by Rule 72, paragraph 1, probably those provided transparently in the original contract documents. In this case, it would appear that the same difficulties are encountered in structuring contractual agreements for the use of innovation partnerships as for those previously faced with competition and competition negotiations. One of the difficulties in using competition dialogue or negotiated competitive procedures has been to identify, cost and describe the need for an „innovative“ solution (at least in terms of structure); depending on the economic players, in order to propose precisely this innovation. Although it is customary to sketch the problem (not the solution), it remains necessary to have some precision in estimating the value of the contract, in describing the technical specification and d