BUDGETARY INSTITUTIONS AS SUBJECTS IN THE SPHERE OF PROCUREMENTS ACCORDING TO THE CONTRACTUAL SYSTEM


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The article deals with the changes of the legal status of civil institutions operating in Russia contract system in the procurement of goods, works and services for state and municipal needs, which entered into force on 1 January 2014 Budget institutions are obliged to follow the provisions of the contract system, but however, identified cases of procurement rules, other than established by this law.

About the authors

V. V. Lukyanova

the Dept. of Economics and Municipal Management, Samara State University, Samara, 443011, Russian Federation.

Author for correspondence.
Email: morenov.sv@ssau.ru

References

  1. «Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Part One)» from 30.11.1994 № 51-FZ (ed. By 05.05.2014). Russian newspaper. 1994. 8 December [in Russian].
  2. Budget Code of the Russian Federation dated 31.07.1998 № 145-FZ (ed. by 10.22.2014). Russian newspaper. 1998. 12 Augus [in Russian].
  3. Federal Law of 05.04.2013 № 44-FZ (ed. by 07.21.2014) «On the contract system in the procurement of goods, works and services for state and municipal needs». Russian newspaper. 2013. 12 April [in Russian].
  4. Federal Law of 18.07.2011 № 223-FZ (ed. by 12.03.2014) «On the procurement of goods, works and services of certain kinds of legal entities». Russian newspaper. 2011. 22 July [in Russian].
  5. The Federal Law of 08.05.2010 № 83-FZ (ed. by 04.10.2014) «On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the improvement of the legal status of state (municipal) institutions». Russian newspaper. 2010. 12 May [in Russian].
  6. Federal Law of 12.01.1996 № 7-FZ (ed. from 14.10.2014) «On Nonprofit Organizations». Russian newspaper. 1996. 21 January [in Russian].
  7. Government Decree of 25.11.2013 № 1063 «On approval of determining the amount of fines, penalties in the event of improper execution of the customer, the supplier (contractor, executor) obligations under the contract (except for the delay in the fulfillment of obligations by the customer, the supplier (contractor, executor) and the size of the fines accrued for each day of delay in execution of the supplier (contractor, executor) obligation under the contract». Meeting of the legislation of the Russian Federation. 2013. № 48. Art. 6266 [in Russian].
  8. Komissarova E.G. Unity and differentiation in the regulation of the legal status of the budget and state institutions. Jurisprudence and law enforcement practice. 2013. № 4 (26). P. 21–31 [in Russian].
  9. Lukyanov V.V., Rudakov O.V. Social efficiency of state and municipal government. Fundamentals of Economics, Management and Law, 2013, no. 6 (12), pp. 23–28[in Russian].
  10. Polotovsky E.J. The responsibility of the state (municipal) institutions for the obligations. Municipal Service: legal issues, 2013, no. 3, pp. 14–16 [in Russian].
  11. Tyurikov M.S. Institutions as members of the contract system in the procurement of goods, works and services for state and municipal needs. Bulletin of the University of Perm, 2014, no. 2 (24), pp. 160–168 [in Russian].
  12. Churyaev A.V. Procurement rules change again. PE-Lawyer, 2014, no. 4, pp. 10 [in Russian].

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2018 Vestnik of Samara University. Economics and Management

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies