CAIS EPP Issues in Public Procurement

A technical issue in CAIS EPP may affect access to a procedure, the signing and submission of a tender, receipt of communications, or the performance of an action by the contracting authority. The legal significance of the issue, however, is not determined solely by the appearance of an error message on the screen. It is necessary to establish the cause, precise time, duration, affected functionality, actions taken by the user, and the data recorded on the platform.

CAIS EPP maintains records of user operations and the time at which they were performed. In the event of a dispute, decisive evidence may therefore include not only screenshots, but also the electronic procurement file, system records, qualified electronic timestamps, correspondence with technical support, and official information published by the Public Procurement Agency.

Legal assistance may be required both by a candidate or tenderer who was unable to perform an action within the prescribed period and by a contracting authority that must assess the consequences of an interruption, apply the rules equally to all persons, and defend its decision. General information about public procurement procedures is available on the page legal assistance with public procurement.

When does a technical issue in CAIS EPP have legal significance?

A technical difficulty has legal significance where it may be connected with a missed deadline, incomplete submission, missing document, incorrectly recorded action, restricted access to the procedure, or another adverse consequence. A general assertion that the system “was not working” is not sufficient. It must be established precisely what could not be done and whether the cause lay with CAIS EPP, the electronic signature, the device, the internet connection, user permissions, or the actions of the particular person.

The legal analysis will normally examine:

what action had to be performed and by what deadline;
whether the action was commenced sufficiently early and which steps were completed;
what message was displayed by the platform and at what time;
whether an official interruption of CAIS EPP was recorded;
whether the particular procurement was included in the published list of affected procedures;
what was recorded in the electronic procurement file and the history of operations;
whether the issue genuinely affected access or participation;
what act, action, or omission resulted from the issue.

Not every technical issue results in an extension of a deadline, annulment of a decision, or restoration of participation. The particular assessment depends on the statutory requirements and the evidence available in the procedure.

The most common issues when using CAIS EPP

In practice, difficulties may arise in relation to:

logging into a user account or accessing the organisation’s account;
missing or incorrectly allocated user permissions;
the use of an expired, blocked, or unrecognised qualified electronic signature;
incompatibility between the qualified electronic signature, signing software, browser, or operating environment;
uploading files, interrupted transfers, or incomplete loading;
the format, size, name, or content of documents;
signing or encrypting a request to participate, tender, or individual document;
decrypting submitted proposals;
failure to complete the final submission even though the files were prepared or uploaded;
receiving and opening messages, requests for clarification, or other notifications;
temporary interruption of a particular function or the entire platform;
a discrepancy between the action expected and the action recorded in the electronic procurement file.

From a legal perspective, it is important to distinguish between preparing, uploading, signing, and finally submitting a tender. The existence of a document on a computer, or even its upload to the working environment, does not in itself prove that the tender or request to participate was successfully submitted within the prescribed period.

What should you do immediately when a technical issue occurs?

Actions taken during the first few minutes may be decisive for subsequent proof. A technical solution should be sought while a reliable record of the issue is preserved at the same time.

Record the exact time. Note the hour and minute of the first issue, the deadline, and every subsequent action.
Take screenshots. Where possible, they should show the entire screen, the page address, the error message, and visible time information.
Preserve the exact wording of the error. Copy it rather than relying solely on a later description.
Preserve the files. Retain the final versions of the documents, their dates, electronic signatures, and evidence of signature validity.
Check other possible causes. Test the qualified electronic signature, internet connection, user permissions, and working environment without deleting evidence of the original issue.
Contact technical support. Submit a specific report and retain its reference number, time, content, and the response received.
Check official notices published by the Public Procurement Agency. Establish whether information about an unplanned interruption has been published and whether the procedure is listed among those affected.
Do not send documents through an arbitrary channel. Submission by email will not normally replace the required action on the platform. Its legal effect must be assessed in the context of the particular procedure.
Seek legal analysis promptly. The next steps depend on whether the deadline has changed, whether the contracting authority has issued an act, and whether an appeal is available.

A brief practical overview is also available in the blog article “Technical Issues in CAIS EPP During Public Procurement Procedures – What Are Your Legal Options?”.

Platform issue or user-side issue?

This distinction is fundamental. An officially recorded unplanned interruption of CAIS EPP may result in an automatic change to certain deadlines where the statutory conditions are met. A local issue involving a device, internet connection, qualified electronic signature, settings, or organisation of work does not automatically produce the same result.

Evidence that may indicate a platform issue

an official Public Procurement Agency notice concerning an unplanned interruption;
inclusion of the particular procurement in a published list of affected procedures;
simultaneous impact on multiple users or functions;
system records indicating unavailability or an unsuccessful operation;
confirmation from the technical support centre.

Evidence that may indicate a local or user-side issue

an expired or invalid qualified electronic signature;
lack of the necessary permissions in the organisation’s account;
an issue affecting only one device or one local network;
unsupported software or incorrect configuration;
a file that does not meet the technical requirements;
commencement of submission immediately before the deadline;
failure to complete the final submission step.

The boundary is not always obvious. A system issue may affect different users differently, or a local malfunction may coincide with a platform interruption. The conclusion must therefore be based on the evidence considered as a whole.

Unplanned interruption and automatic changes to deadlines

The Rules for the Implementation of the Public Procurement Act provide a special consequence where the platform or a necessary function is interrupted unexpectedly. Where the interruption lasts for more than 30 minutes during the final two hours before the expiry of a preclusive time limit for a particular action, the deadline expires at the time originally specified on the day following restoration of the platform, subject also to the rules governing non-working days.

In such cases, and where the deadline expired during the interruption, the platform automatically changes the prescribed deadlines for:

receipt of tenders or requests to participate;
opening of tenders or requests to participate;
opening of financial proposals.

The Public Procurement Agency publishes a notice specifying the interruption period and a list of procurements whose deadlines have been changed. Where a deadline for requesting clarification has been affected, the contracting authority is required to change the related receipt and opening deadlines in accordance with the Rules.

This rule should not be applied mechanically to every delay or error message. The duration, relevant time period, affected function, and official information concerning the particular procedure must be examined. Scheduled technical maintenance is also not equivalent to an unplanned interruption; users are expected to organise their work in accordance with the schedule announced in advance.

Where can official information be checked?

Where an interruption or change in functionality is suspected, official sources of the Public Procurement Agency should be used. Useful resources include the page containing information about unplanned interruptions of CAIS EPP and the section containing current instructions and video materials for using the platform.

The published notice should be compared with the precise period of the issue, the deadline, and the list of affected procurements. The general existence of a technical maintenance notice does not automatically prove that the particular operation or procedure was affected.

What do the CAIS EPP records prove?

The platform maintains a record of every operation connected with the procurement process, including the creation and exchange of documents, the persons involved in the operations, and the time at which actions were performed. These records constitute evidence of the integrity and completeness of the information, authorship, and time of performance.

The time of facts having legal or technical significance is recorded to the date, hour, minute, and second and is certified by a qualified electronic timestamp. The clock setting on a user’s computer or the time stated in an informal document cannot therefore replace the system data.

Evidence relevant to a particular dispute may include:

the history of actions in the electronic procurement file;
confirmation that a request to participate or tender was submitted;
recorded timestamp data;
system messages and notifications;
electronically signed files and signature data;
reports submitted to technical support and the responses received;
official interruption notices;
screenshots, video recordings, and technical logs where available;
data from the browser, device, or network where relevant.

A screenshot is useful, but on its own it will not always prove the cause or duration of the issue or what was recorded by the platform. The most reliable analysis compares user-generated evidence with the system records.

Qualified electronic signatures, uploading, signing, and final submission

Issue with a qualified electronic signature

Before submission, the validity of the certificate, the authority of the signatory, access to the organisation’s account, and the operation of the necessary signing software should be checked. A failed signing message may result from the platform, the qualified electronic signature, a driver, the browser, or a local setting.

In the event of a dispute, the certificate, signature validation data, exact error message, and information identifying the user who performed the action should be preserved. Actions performed on the platform by authorised users are treated as actions of the relevant economic operator or contracting authority.

Issue when uploading files

It should be checked whether the file was selected, uploaded in full, and placed in the correct section. Its format, size, technical integrity, electronic signature, and consistency between the file name and its actual content may be relevant. An incomplete upload or placement of a document in the wrong section may result in its absence from the submitted tender even though the document exists on the tenderer’s device.

Incomplete submission

Preparing a tender in the working environment is not the same as completing its final submission. It should be confirmed that the platform recorded successful completion of the relevant operation and that a confirmation is available. Where the user remained at an intermediate stage or began the final step after the deadline, subsequent legal protection may be significantly more difficult.

Encryption and decryption

In procedures where the platform uses encryption followed by decryption of proposals, it must be established which operation failed, who was required to perform it, and what was recorded by the system. The cause may differ between preparation of the tender and its opening by the evaluation committee, and the evidence should therefore be examined separately.

Legal protection of candidates and tenderers

Where a technical issue has resulted in a tender not being submitted, a clarification being missed, a document being absent, or the tenderer being excluded, the first task is to establish whether the adverse result arose from an official interruption, an action by the contracting authority, or a circumstance within the tenderer’s sphere of responsibility.

Legal assistance may include:

reviewing the deadline and system time;
analysing the history of operations and the electronic procurement file;
reviewing the qualified electronic signature, signed files, and technical messages;
checking whether an official unplanned interruption occurred;
assessing whether the procurement was included among the affected procedures;
analysing an exclusion decision or another adverse action;
preparing an objection, written submission, or appeal where legally available;
representation before the CPC and SAC.

Further information about participation in procedures is available on the page public procurement for tenderers and contractors. Where the technical issue has resulted in exclusion, see also the page legal protection following exclusion from a public procurement procedure.

What should the contracting authority do?

The contracting authority must act on the basis of the system data, the applicable statutory rules, and the principles of equal treatment, publicity, and transparency. It should not automatically accept either that every allegation of a technical error is justified or that every failure lies entirely within the tenderer’s sphere of responsibility.

Where a dispute arises, it is necessary to examine:

whether an officially recorded interruption occurred and its duration;
which function was affected;
whether the deadlines in the timetable were changed automatically;
whether the procurement was included in the official Public Procurement Agency list;
what the electronic procurement file records show;
whether a deadline for requesting clarification was affected;
whether all candidates and tenderers were treated equally;
whether an action performed outside the platform may be taken into account without infringing the PPA;
how the subsequent decision should be reasoned.

The contracting authority should not arbitrarily accept documents by email or permit corrections outside the prescribed procedure. Such action may create unequal treatment and give rise to a separate dispute. Legal assistance with the preparation and defence of procedures is described on the page public procurement for contracting authorities.

When may a technical issue constitute grounds for an appeal?

Under the PPA, decisions of the contracting authority, together with actions or omissions that obstruct access to or participation in the procedure, may be challenged. A technical issue is not an independent ground for appeal merely because it occurred. There must be a connection between the issue, the conduct of the contracting authority or platform, and the particular interference with rights or legitimate interests.

Depending on the circumstances, the analysis may concern:

an exclusion decision based on a tender that was not submitted or was submitted incompletely;
a refusal to recognise an automatic change to the deadline;
an action or omission that obstructed access or participation;
unequal treatment of persons affected by a similar technical issue;
a decision based on an incomplete or incorrectly interpreted electronic procurement file.

In the applicable circumstances, the appeal period is 10 days, but the starting date depends on the type of act, action, or omission being challenged. Where an action obstructs access or participation, the period is connected with notification of that action, while in the absence of notification or in cases of omission, it is connected with the time specified by law. Failure to comply with the deadline results in inadmissibility, and the analysis should therefore not be delayed.

The appeal must contain specific objections and evidence. A general assertion that “CAIS EPP was not working”, without identifying the time, affected function, system data, and causal connection, will not normally be sufficient for effective legal protection. Detailed information about the proceedings is available on the page public procurement appeals before the CPC and SAC.

How can the risk be reduced before the deadline?

Good organisation cannot eliminate technical issues, but it significantly improves the ability to respond promptly and prove what occurred.

check access to the account and user permissions in advance;
check the validity of the qualified electronic signature and signing software;
prepare the final files sufficiently early;
observe file format and size restrictions;
do not leave uploading and submission until the final minutes;
check that every required part has been placed in the correct section;
preserve confirmation that the submission was completed;
monitor official notices concerning scheduled maintenance;
appoint a backup authorised user and working environment where organisationally possible;
preserve a copy of the entire submitted tender and all electronic signatures.

What documents are required for an initial legal analysis?

The following will normally be required:

the link and unique number of the public procurement procedure;
the exact deadline for the relevant action;
a brief chronology setting out times and actions taken;
screenshots, video recordings, and the exact error messages;
the report submitted to technical support and the response received;
the official interruption notice, where one exists;
information establishing whether the procurement was included in the list of affected procedures;
the files that were being prepared or submitted;
data relating to the qualified electronic signature and electronic signatures applied;
confirmation that the tender was submitted, or the absence of such confirmation;
messages and the history of actions on the platform;
the contracting authority’s decision and the evaluation committee’s minutes and report, where they have already been issued;
evidence of the date on which the adverse act was served.

Legal assistance with CAIS EPP issues

Ivanova LLP Law Firm provides legal assistance to candidates, tenderers, contractors, and contracting authorities in relation to technical and procedural issues involving CAIS EPP.

Our assistance may include:

analysing the electronic procurement file and timestamp data;
reviewing the applicable deadline and the consequences of the interruption;
assessing the technical and electronic evidence collected;
legal analysis of an exclusion or restricted access to a procedure;
preparing written submissions, objections, and applications;
preparing and filing an appeal before the CPC;
representation before the CPC and SAC;
advising the contracting authority concerning deadlines, equal treatment, and the reasoning of decisions.

Send the information and documents for a preliminary legal analysis

Frequently Asked Questions

What should I do if I cannot submit my tender because of an issue in CAIS EPP?

Preserve the exact error message, time, screenshots, files, and qualified electronic signature data. Report the issue to technical support immediately, check the official Public Procurement Agency notices, and establish whether the platform recorded any part of the operation. The next steps depend on the cause of the issue and the applicable deadline.

Does every technical issue extend the submission deadline?

No. An automatic change to certain deadlines is provided where an official unplanned interruption of the platform or a necessary function satisfies the specific conditions under the Rules for the Implementation of the PPA. A local issue involving a device, internet connection, qualified electronic signature, or the user’s actions does not automatically result in an extension.

What constitutes an unplanned interruption under the Rules for the Implementation of the PPA?

The interruption has legal significance where operation of the platform or a necessary function is interrupted for more than 30 minutes during the final two hours before expiry of a preclusive time limit. The official information published by the Public Procurement Agency and whether the particular procurement was affected must be checked.

Is a screenshot sufficient to prove a technical issue?

It will not usually be sufficient on its own. It should be compared with the system records, timestamp data, the report submitted to technical support, official interruption notices, and the electronic procurement file. A screenshot shows what the user saw but will not always prove the cause or duration of the issue.

What should I do if there is a problem with the qualified electronic signature?

Check the validity of the certificate, the signatory’s authority, the signing software, browser, and user permissions. Preserve the error message and signature validation data. It is necessary to establish whether the cause lies with the qualified electronic signature, the local environment, or the platform.

Can the tender be sent by email if the platform is not working?

Submission by email will not normally replace the prescribed method of submission through CAIS EPP. Arbitrary acceptance of documents outside the platform may infringe the principle of equal treatment. The statutory rules concerning interruption should be applied, and the particular legal effect must be assessed.

Can an exclusion connected with CAIS EPP be appealed?

Yes, where the challenged act is subject to review, the person has sufficient legal interest, and the appeal is filed within the prescribed period. The specific technical issue, the actions taken, the system data, and the connection between the issue and the exclusion or restriction of participation must be proven.

What should the contracting authority examine when a technical issue is reported?

The contracting authority should examine the official interruption information, the affected function, any automatic change to deadlines, the system records, and the particular procurement. Its decision must observe the principle of equal treatment and contain adequate reasons.

What documents are required for a preliminary legal analysis?

The required documents include the link and procurement number, the deadline, the chronology of actions, screenshots, error messages, the report submitted to technical support, the files, qualified electronic signature data, system confirmations, and any act issued by the contracting authority.

Last updated:

6 August 2026

The information on this page is provided for general explanatory purposes and does not replace individual legal advice. The legal significance of a technical issue, the applicable time limit, and the available remedy depend on the particular public procurement procedure, the system records, the actions of the users, and the acts issued.

Legal Assistance with CAIS EPP Issues in Public Procurement