This article is devoted to the study of the legal status of legal relations’ subjects in the public procurement field, as well as the settlement of legislative problems that arise in the spheres of public procurement and public-private partnerships (PPP) in Ukraine. The necessity of implementation into the legislation of Ukraine the concept of “special purpose company” is substantiated. The experience of foreign countries in implementing PPP projects in the area of “public procurement” (for instance, Latvia, Australia, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium and other countries) is analyzed in detail. In particular, it has been determined that in Belgium mainly two methods of public procurement are used: concession agreements for the performance of work and development agreements, which in any case provide for financing the project by the private sector. Under the concession agreement for the performance of work, a private partner carries out the construction and financing of the entire volume of work or part thereof, and also subsequently operates the facility for a certain period of time. When making public procurement under PPP (development agreement), a private enterprise finances the work and further construction, after which it transfers ownership or leases the facility to a public partner or third party. The public partner or the aforementioned third party further pays the rent or license fee to the private company. Belgian public procurement laws do not apply to concession contracts for the provision of services, which, however, must correspond to the requirements of the general principles of contracts, such as, for example, the principles of transparency and competition. It is proved that the establishment of the Unified State Register of public sector entities will allow to unify the legislation of Ukraine in the field of PPP. The thesis is substantiated that the implementation of PPP projects is possible by applying the so-called “property law Construction”, in which these projects can be implemented through the alienation or transfer of state property rights (purchase and sale, long-term property right to use real estate), or “superficial right”. At the same time, public procurement legislation is not being apllied if public sector entities do not stipulate specific conditions under which private partner acquires a property right to the corresponding real estate and enjoys this right (when, for example, a state authority sells land to a private partner, provided that the latter will build the parking lot complex), and also if no obligation to purchase or lease can be imposed subject to the legislation in public procurement sphere.
This article is devoted to the research of international experience of public-private partnership (PPP) within sport projects realization, as well as the development of ways how to solve the corresponding problems. The concept of “infrastructure development contract” is substantiated. The international experience of PPP for implementing projects in the field of sports (Singapore, India, Denmark, Poland, South Africa) has been analyzed. It has been proved that Denmark had negative experience while Farumís Sport Arena had been constructed. Mostly it caused by the fact that the structure of the contractual management was too complicated for the control of the mayor of the city, and also by the fact that PPP at that time were a relatively new phenomenon for central government bodies. In addition, there was no effective regulation of PPP, especially at the level of municipalities. The main reason for the failed experience of PPP in Farum, experts called the violation of regulations issued by the European Union in terms of regulation of tenders and implementation of contracts. The legal status of World Sports Alliance (WSA) has been investigated. The author insists that attraction of such sport organizations to PPP for projects’ implementation in the sphere of sport will allow partners to make risks’ and responsibilities’ allocation in the most economically effective way. The author concludes that definition of “infrastructure development contract” should be implemented into Ukraine’s legislation. Herewith “infrastructure development contract” is a long-term (from 5 to 50 years) cooperation between the state of Ukraine, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, united territorial communities represented by the relevant state bodies and local self-government bodies (state partners) and legal entities, except state and communal enterprises, or individuals – entrepreneurs (private partners) carried out on the basis of the contract or on the basis of the reversal of a special economic organization of a corporate type (economic association). This cooperation implies the construction, modernization, maintenance of infrastructure facilities at the expense of funds and the industrial/scientific potential of the private partner during the term of the contract/economic organization, while the ownership of the assets and the authority to monitor the proper fulfillment of obligations (“term-quality”) transferred to the public partner. The contractor’s sources of income under the life cycle contract are compensation payments from the concedent for the construction and operation of a sports facility as an object of state ownership.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.