1. The subject of the contract is the supply of medical equipment divided into parts for the implementation of the project: increasing the quality and availability of complementary medical services in the field of osteoarticular-muscular system diseases, provided by SP ZOZ MSWiA in Poznań in order to strengthen the health condition of adults and their professional activity.

2. The subject of the order should be brand new, ready to work without any additional purchases and investments, delivered at the Contractor's cost, risk and transport, along with documentation in Polish.

3. The year of assembly and delivery is also the year of production of the given equipment, apparatus and equipment. In justified cases, with the consent of the Employer, resulting from the investment process, assembly or delivery of devices manufactured in the year preceding the year of delivery is allowed.

4. The Awarding Entity allows the submission of partial bids.

5. The order was divided into IX parts.

1. The subject of the order is the supply of: Monitoring Center + 2 stations - 1 set, Monitoring Center + 7 stations - 1 set.

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is the delivery of: Defibrillator - 2 pcs.

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of compliance with the requirements of individual items of the technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is delivery: ECG - 1 item

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is the delivery of: Mobile ventilators - 7 pcs.

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is the delivery: Mobile USG - 1 pc, Mobile USG - 1 pc, Mobile USG - 1 pc

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of compliance with the requirements of individual items of the technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is delivery: Artromot CPM (rail) - 2 pcs, Fango mass mixer - 1 set, Therapeutic diode laser - 1 pc, Bicycle Ergometer - 2 pcs, WKG upper limb centrifuge - 1 pc, WKD centrifuge lower limbs - 1 item

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is the delivery: C-drive arm - 1 pc, stationary X-ray with ceiling suspension - 1 pc, bedside X-ray - 1 pc.

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is delivery: Beds with mattresses - 18 pcs.

2. The trademarks, proper names, norms, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications etc. indicated in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological model regarding the subject of the order.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of compliance with the requirements of individual items of the technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.

1. The subject of the order is the delivery of: Intensive care beds with therapeutic mattresses - 4 pcs.

2. The trademarks, proper names, standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, etc. specified in the documents - constitute only a qualitative, functional, technical and technological standard regarding the subject of the contract.

In all cases where due to the specification of the subject of the order the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin, standards, technical assessments, approvals and technical specifications have been indicated, the use of materials, devices, software, standards, technical assessments is allowed , technical approvals and specifications, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software standards, technical assessments, technical approvals and specifications, systems used in the documentation provided by the Employer or their origin, are only used to determine the standard and can be replaced by others with no worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Possible indicated names of products and their producers, standards are not intended to violate the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of Contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies when the Employer described the subject of the contract using standards, European technical assessments. The names used in the documentation, which indicate or could be associated with the manufacturer or company, are not intended to give preference to the solutions of a given manufacturer but to indicate a solution that should have technical and technological features not worse than those given in the technical documentation. The contracting authority in the case of offers containing equivalent solutions will verify them in terms of compliance with the requirements of individual items of the technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the ToR. The Contractor, who refers to equivalent solutions described by the Employer, is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by him meet the requirements specified by the Employer. The contractor is obliged to prove in the offer the equivalence of the offered devices, software or systems and standards. The burden of proof of equivalence is the Contractor's responsibility. The Employer will not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements than those specified in Annex 2 to the ToR.