The constant development of techniques and methods of interpersonal communication made it necessary to take into account new solutions in the functioning of public administration, which in turn forced the need to prepare a new legal regulation, adequate to the challenges of modern times. The entry into force on October 5, 2021 of the Act on electronic deliveries heralded the revolution that began in the field of electronic deliveries, with the transition to deliveries based on a public service of registered electronic delivery, a public hybrid service and the introduction of the obligation to have new addresses for electronic deliveries. Since October 5, 2021, i.e. the moment the new regulation enters into force, a practical problem arose as to how applications should be submitted to the public administration body via electronic means of commu18 Marcin Adamczyk nication so that they produce the desired legal effect and are not left unexamined. Therefore, problems arose as to how to effectively conduct electronic communication with a public administration body and how long the transitional period in which legal dualism in the field of electronic deliveries will last. Another problem resulting from the entry into force of the new regulations is the issue of advising the applicant who submits an application to a public administration body by means of an ordinary e-mail to the e-mail address about leaving his application without examination. The purpose of this study is to seek answers to emerging problems based on the provisions of the Act on Electronic Delivery, including transitional provisions. The study in question indicates the need to prepare instructions on the principles of electronic communication, which should be provided to the parties or participants in the proceedings at the first contact or together with information about leaving the application unprocessed if the application is sent to an e-mail address. The parallel use of two solutions for the delivery of electronic correspondence to (and “from”) a public administration body, i.e. both based on an address for electronic delivery and an electronic inbox for ePUAP, is necessary and inevitable, because the introduction of new solutions without a transitional period is not possible. Nevertheless, the length of the transitional period raises legitimate concerns. On the one hand, we are dealing with a weakening of the constructions provided for in the Act on electronic deliveries, on the other hand, both public administration bodies and non-public entities must function in a kind of legal dualism defining two equivalent delivery systems.

Maciej Bendorf-Bundorf

Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie


Abstract

The system of socioeconomic relationships occurring in the modern democratic states tends to blur the boundaries between the public and non-governmental sectors, which creates the need for a similar evaluation of the two
categories of entities from the point of view of their impact on the public interest. The tasks and goals carried out by foundations and associations often coincide with the tasks and goals that public entities, including local government
units, are obliged to implement. The indicated convergence is particularly visible on the level of tasks in the field of public education, as foundations and associations are entitled to act as the governing body of schools.
This contribution aims to answer the question of whether subsidies received by a school managed by a foundation or association should be considered as a condition for obtaining the status of a body governed by public law in the
meaning of public procurement law.


Keywords:

public procurement law, foundation, associations, body governed by public law, subsidies for schools


Bandarzewski K., Chmielnicki P., Dobosz P., Kisiel W., Kryczko P., Mączyński M., Płażek S., Komentarz do ustawy o samorządzie gminnym, warszawa 2007.   Google Scholar

Bovis C.H., EU Public Procurement Law, Cheltenham 2012.   Google Scholar

Dolnicki B. (red.), Ustawa o samorządzie gminnym. Komentarz, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Dolnicki B., Samorząd terytorialny, Warszawa 2019.   Google Scholar

Dolnicki B. (red.), Sposoby realizacji zadań publicznych, Warszawa 2017.   Google Scholar

Dolnicki B. (red.), Ustawa o samorządzie powiatowym. Komentarz, Warszawa 2020.   Google Scholar

Drembkowski P. (red.), Ustawa o samorządzie powiatowym. Komentarz, Warszawa 2019.   Google Scholar

Dzierżanowski W., Jaźwiński Ł., Jerzykowski J., Kittel M., Stachowiak M., Prawo zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Gajewski S., Jakubowski A. (red.), Ustawy samorządowe. Komentarz, Warszawa 2018.   Google Scholar

Gawrońska-Baran A., Wiktorowska E., Wiktorowski A., Wójcik P., Prawo zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Gawroński K., Kwiatkowski S.M. (red.), Prawo oświatowe, Warszawa 2022.   Google Scholar

Granecki P., Granecka I., Prawo zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Gura G., Ustawa o fundacjach. Komentarz, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Izdebski H., Samorząd terytorialny. Pionowy podział władzy, Warszawa 2020.   Google Scholar

Jaworska M. (red.), Prawo zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Kietlińska K., Rola trzeciego sektora w społeczeństwie obywatelskim, Warszawa 2010.   Google Scholar

Kowalski A., Orzecznictwo Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej w zakresie zamówień publicznych w latach 2009-2017, Warszawa 2017.   Google Scholar

Lachiewicz W., Pawlikowska A. (red.), Ustawa o systemie oświaty. Komentarz, Warszawa 2016.   Google Scholar

Opinia prawna UZP „Obowiązek stosowania ustawy Prawo zamówień publicznych przez fundacje oraz stowarzyszenia – stosowanie ustawy Prawo zamówień publicznych na podstawie art. 3 ust. 1 pkt 3 oraz art. 3 ust. 1 pkt 5”, dostępna na stronie internetowej UZP: https://www.uzp.gov.pl/baza-wiedzy/interpretacja-przepisow/opinie-archiwalne [dostęp na 30.06.2022].   Google Scholar

Opinia prawna UZP „Podmioty prawa publicznego w świetle prawa UE”, dostępna na stronie internetowej UZP: https://www.uzp.gov.pl/baza-wiedzy/interpretacja-przepisow/opinie-archiwalne [dostęp na 30.06.2022].   Google Scholar

Opinia prawna UZP „Stosowanie ustawy Prawo zamówień publicznych przez stowarzyszenia wydatkujące środki pochodzące z 1% podatku dochodowego od osób fizycznych”, dostępna na stronie internetowej UZP: https://www.uzp.gov.pl/baza-wiedzy/interpretacja-przepisow/opinie-archiwalne [dostęp na 30.06.2022].   Google Scholar

Opinia prawna UZP „Stosowanie ustawy Prawo zamówień publicznych przez organizacje pozarządowe uzyskujące dotacje z budżetu państwa na realizację zadań publicznych”, dostępna na stronie internetowej UZP: https://www.uzp.gov.pl/baza-wiedzy/interpretacja-przepisow/opinie-archiwalne [dostęp na 30.06.2022].   Google Scholar

Pawelec J., Dyrektywa 2014/24/UE w sprawie zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2015.   Google Scholar

Pieróg J., Prawo zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2019.   Google Scholar

Pilich M., Olszewski A., Prawo oświatowe. Komentarz, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Pilich M. (red.), Finansowanie zadań oświatowych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2020.   Google Scholar

Piszko A., Ustawa o systemie oświaty, Komentarz, Warszawa 2018.   Google Scholar

Sołtysińska A., Talago-Sławoj H., Europejskie prawo zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2016.   Google Scholar

Stachowiak M., Jerzykowski J., Dzierżanowski W., Prawo zamówień publicznych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2012.   Google Scholar

Staszczyk P., Ustawa o fundacjach. Komentarz praktyczny, Warszawa 2015.   Google Scholar

Suski P., Stowarzyszenia i fundacje, Warszawa 2018.   Google Scholar

Szewc A., Jyż G., Pławecki Z., Ustawa o samorządzie gminnym. Komentarz, Warszawa 2012.   Google Scholar

Verdeaux J., Public procurement in the European Union and in the United States: a comparative study, “Public Contract Law Journal” 2003, nr 4.   Google Scholar

Wojtczak B., Prawo oświaty niepublicznej, Warszawa 2021.   Google Scholar

Zaborowski M., Cel i funkcje zamówień publicznych, „Optimum studia ekonomiczne” 2019, nr 3.   Google Scholar


Published
2022-12-19

Cited by

Bendorf-Bundorf, M. (2022). The constant development of techniques and methods of interpersonal communication made it necessary to take into account new solutions in the functioning of public administration, which in turn forced the need to prepare a new legal regulation, adequate to the challenges of modern times. The entry into force on October 5, 2021 of the Act on electronic deliveries heralded the revolution that began in the field of electronic deliveries, with the transition to deliveries based on a public service of registered electronic delivery, a public hybrid service and the introduction of the obligation to have new addresses for electronic deliveries. Since October 5, 2021, i.e. the moment the new regulation enters into force, a practical problem arose as to how applications should be submitted to the public administration body via electronic means of commu18 Marcin Adamczyk nication so that they produce the desired legal effect and are not left unexamined. Therefore, problems arose as to how to effectively conduct electronic communication with a public administration body and how long the transitional period in which legal dualism in the field of electronic deliveries will last. Another problem resulting from the entry into force of the new regulations is the issue of advising the applicant who submits an application to a public administration body by means of an ordinary e-mail to the e-mail address about leaving his application without examination. The purpose of this study is to seek answers to emerging problems based on the provisions of the Act on Electronic Delivery, including transitional provisions. The study in question indicates the need to prepare instructions on the principles of electronic communication, which should be provided to the parties or participants in the proceedings at the first contact or together with information about leaving the application unprocessed if the application is sent to an e-mail address. The parallel use of two solutions for the delivery of electronic correspondence to (and “from”) a public administration body, i.e. both based on an address for electronic delivery and an electronic inbox for ePUAP, is necessary and inevitable, because the introduction of new solutions without a transitional period is not possible. Nevertheless, the length of the transitional period raises legitimate concerns. On the one hand, we are dealing with a weakening of the constructions provided for in the Act on electronic deliveries, on the other hand, both public administration bodies and non-public entities must function in a kind of legal dualism defining two equivalent delivery systems. Studia Prawnoustrojowe, (58). https://doi.org/10.31648/sp.7955

Maciej Bendorf-Bundorf 
Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie