Procurement

Determinations

VANTAGE POINT INTERNATIONAL INC.
File No. PR-2006-009

Download full document in MS Word format, compressed - zip (7K) through FTP

Download full document in Adobe Acrobat format (76K) through FTP

Download full document in MS Word format, compressed - zip (7K) through HTTP

Download full document in Adobe Acrobat format (76K) through HTTP

BY FACSIMILE

May 10, 2006

___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________
___________________

___________________:

The Canadian International Trade Tribunal (the Tribunal) (Presiding Member: Ellen Fry), has reviewed the complaint submitted on behalf of Vantage Point International Inc. (VPI) on May 3, 2006, and has decided not to initiate an inquiry into the complaint.

The complaint alleged that the Department of Public Works and Government Services (PWGSC) had improperly awarded a contract to C-CORE, a private sector non-profit corporation. Specifically, VPI alleged that the legal objects of C-CORE’s Supplementary Letters of Patent (Letters), dated September 7, 1992, limits C-CORE to work only on certain matters, and that the work contemplated by the solicitation in question is not a permissible task under those Letters.

Subsection 7(1)(c) of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Procurement Inquiry Regulations (the Regulations) provides, in part, that the Tribunal shall, within five working days after the day on which the complaint is filed, determine whether “the information provided by the complainant… discloses a reasonable indication that the procurement has not been carried out in accordance with whichever of Chapter Ten of NAFTA, Chapter Five of the Agreement on Internal Trade, or the Agreement on Government Procurement applies”.

In its complaint, VPI provided the Tribunal with the request for proposal (RFP) and a copy of C-CORE’s Letters, alleging that the incompatibilities between the two documents precluded C-CORE from being legally able to bid on the contract in question. The Tribunal notes that VPI itself acknowledges, at paragraph 4 of schedule A of its complaint, that PWGSC was unaware of the alleged incapacity when it awarded the contract to C-CORE. The evidence does not indicate that under the evaluation process established by the RFP it was improper for PWGSC to rely on C-CORE’s certification in its bid that it could legally perform the subject contract. The Tribunal is therefore of the view that the allegation made by VPI is a matter of contract administration and does not fall within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the Tribunal finds that the complaint fails to disclose a reasonable indication that the procurement has not been carried out in accordance with the applicable trade agreements.

In light of the above, the Tribunal will not conduct an inquiry into this complaint and it hereby considers the matter closed.

Yours sincerely,

Hélène Nadeau
Secretary