Tomasz Krzyżanowski

Attorney-at-lawSenior Associate

Bio

Tomasz is a legal expert in public procurement law with more than ten years of experience. At the Law Firm, he is in the TMT Practice and heads the Public Procurement Law Team. Tomasz has cooperated with a number of large entities, mostly from the IT sector, and has provided legal assistance to both contractors and clients. He has extensive experience advising on public procurement cases regarding appeals and complaints. Tomasz advises Clients on all matters concerning public procurement law and civil law. He also assists Clients as an expert in public procurement on tender committees. Tomasz honed his skills as a lawyer in such institutions as the Chancellery of the Sejm, the Investment and Public Procurement Office, and Grupa Doradcza Sienna [Sienna Advisory Group].

Tomasz chairs the Public Sector Tender Committee at the Polish Chamber of Information Technology and Telecommunications (PIIT). He is a co-author of the PIIT’s position statements in response to the decision of the National Appeals Chamber to declare a qualified electronic signature invalid on account of the use of the SHA-1 hash function and on the validity of bids submitted as a copy of the applicable paper form scanned to a file subsequently signed with a qualified electronic signature.

He is a member of the PIIT working team for good practices in public procurement, and played a part in the Public Procurement Office’s consultations on updating the recommendations for the supply of computer sets.

He is an experienced trainer in the field of public procurement law. He constantly contributes to the monthly journal “Public Orders – Advisor”. He is the author of papers on public procurement in the IT sector and co-author of the publication Zamówienia na sprzęt i usługi informatyczne – analiza siwz w kontekście roli działu IT [Computer Hardware and Services Contracts – an Analysis of ToR in the Context of the Role of the IT Department]. He also acted as a legal expert in a research project into public procurement law systems in countries receiving funding from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in 2011, which culminated in the publication of EBRD Public Procurement Assessment. Review of Laws and Practice in the EBRD Region 2011.

Tomasz is a graduate of the Faculty of Law and Administration at the University of Łódź, British Centre for English Legal Studies at the University of Warsaw (legal studies entirely in English) and the Leon Koźmiński School of Entrepreneurship and Management in Warsaw (postgraduate studies in public procurement).

He speaks English.


Related news

Blog 5
09 Jun 2022

A new form of cybersecurity public tender in Poland. Another in the series of amendments to the National Cybersecurity System Act of 15 March 2022 has been released

The National Cybersecurity System Act of 5 July 2018 forms the legal and institutional bases for cybersecurity in Poland. On 15 March 2022, another version of the proposed amendment to the act was published on the Government Legislation Centre website. This could have major implications, including for the public procurement market in Poland. The proposal allows a business undertaking to be classified as a high-risk supplier, and this may result in a bid being rejected.

31 Mar 2022

New public central register of agreements of public finance sector units in Poland

In an act of 14 October 2021 amending the Criminal Code and certain other acts (the “Amendment”) additions have been made to the Public Finances Act of 27 August 2009, introducing a new institution, the Public Register of Agreements, into the Polish legal system. This realizes a proposal that has been made for many years that there should be greater openness and transparency with regard to public finances, and that this should apply not only to expenditure under public procurement laws, but all other expenditure as well.   

25 Dec 2021

Cybersecurity and public procurement in Poland. Legislative proposal to amend the National Cybersecurity System Act

The National Cybersecurity System Act of 5 July 2018 forms the legal and institutional bases for cybersecurity in Poland. On 12 October 2021, a controversial proposal to amend the act was submitted for consultations. This could have major implications, including for the public procurement market in Poland. The proposal allows a business undertaking to be classified as a high-risk supplier, and this may result in a bid being rejected.

13 Oct 2021

New guidelines issued by the President of the Polish Public Procurement Office on tenders for computers for use by contracting authorities

The Polish Public Procurement Office (UZP) has published UZP President guidelines on awarding public contracts for supply of computers. This is a document of technical nature, containing practical tips on drafting documentation in tenders for supply of various types of computers (desk-top computers, portable computers, all-in-one computers, etc.). The document does not form part of the current legal regime, and only specifies best practices. It has been approved by the Council of Ministers Committee for Digital Affairs and by the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau. The document is available here.

02 Jul 2021

Can a court put conclusion of an agreement by a contracting authority on hold pending review of a complaint contesting a National Appeals Chamber ruling?

In Poland, filing a complaint with the KIO concerning the outcome of a tender or the wording of tender documentation (the first instance) is the principal legal remedy. Under the Public Procurement Law of 11 September 2019, a KIO ruling can be contested before the Warsaw Public Procurement Court (second instance). A complaint is not a very appealing legal remedy, however, because under the law, once the KIO has delivered a ruling, the contracting authority is not required to wait for the ruling on the complaint, and may proceed to conclude an agreement with a contractor even if a competitor intends to contest the KIO ruling in the second instance. In this scenario, even if the contractor successfully contests the KIO ruling in court, it still will not be awarded the contract. At best, the contractor can expect the court to find the contracting authority to be in breach of the act of law, and can seek compensation in a separate lawsuit that will be expensive, difficult to win, and lengthy.

Meet our team

This site is registered on wpml.org as a development site.