Procurement and Contract Management

Procurement and contract management
Student Name
Institution

Question 1
Advise to Boots Project Australia.
In this regard, a determination has to be made as to whether there exists a valid contract between
Kangaroo Island Council and Boots Project Australia, and if so, is there any term of the contract
that has been breached by the council of Kangaroo Island to warrant Boots Project take legal
action.
Following the facts presented in the situation, boots project cannot take legal action against
Kangaroo Island since in a tender awarding process the entity seeking to procure services is at
liberty to settle on any tender which it believes will meet the standards set out in the tender
invitation offer, (Tang, Ng and Skitmore 2019). Therefore in this instance, Kangaroo Council did
not commit any wrong by not awarding the Boots project the tender since e from its invitation
offer it set out the minimum requirements that the company applying for the tender ought to meet
and since it was satisified by the tender submitted by UniSA it is not at any blame as the concept
of free seller free buyer is of essence in the situation.
Further, regarding cost, which played a major role in the awarding of the tender, is of essence
since procurement rules requires that an entity procuring either goods of services should be cost
effect whereby it should consider a company with the best cost and that which can provide
quality services at the lowest possible cost to ensure maximization of the resources,
(Abolbashari, Zakeri and Chang 2018). Therefore, the process of procurement which is normally
done through invitation of tenders constitutes a form of contract since it satisfies the
requirements of a valid contract.

This is so since the initial stage involves the procuring entity inviting individuals to apply for the
tender by making an offer as done by Kangaroo Island on SA Tenders and Contract Website. In
doing so, any tenderer considering the offer applies for it as a form of acceptance. Upon
acceptance the party might consider to make a counter offer as done by Rexell in regards to
tender for the new terminal Information Technology infrastructure, (Vyas, Hayllar and Wu
2018). Finally, if the parties agree to the terms and conditions of the contract they sign the
contract to make it valid, as done in the case of kangaroo island council and UniSA Project R Us.
Further, in regards to cost spend in preparing the tender, Boots cannot be compensated since in
tendering it is always up to the company applying for the tender to give its best in convincing the
other as to why its services should be sought against those of others and therefore one can only
be liable if he has breached the contract which in this instance there is no contract and therefore
Boots cannot seek any legal action against the council.
Question 2
Advice to Rexell
Rexell does not have a binding agreement towards the delivery of services in regards to
information technology project work. This is so since despite the fact that UniSA showed an
interest in hiring Rexell and even promised to hold on to the deal for about a week, the council in
its tender had expressed time being of essence and therefore there was need to ensure that is
secures a contract in time so as to be able to complete the project. In this instance the
communication as to the acceptance of the contract by rexell did not reach UniSA on time since
it is the same day that it accepted a contract from Boots IT Brothers, (Lonsdale et al. 2016).