1. The subject of the contract is the supply of medical equipment and apparatus for the Prof. Ludwik Bierkowski Independent Public Health Care Institution of the Ministry of the Interior and Administration in Poznań.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. The contracting authority shall allow for the submission of partial tenders.

4. The order was divided into 7 parts, i.e.:

Part No. 1 – Echocardiograph and Ultrasound scanner;

Part No. 2 – Orthopaedic drive;

Part No. 3 – Spinal traction device, Stabilometric platform, CPM rail;

Part No. 4 – Diode laser;

Lot No 5 — Autorefractometer;

Part 6 – ECG machine, Set for 24h cardiac diagnostics;

Part 7 – Set of equipment for psychological tests.

1. Echokardiograf i Ultrasonograf.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. Trademarks, proper names, etc. indicated in the documents. – constitute only a quality, functional, technical and technological benchmark relating to the subject-matter of the contract. In all cases in which, due to the specification of the subject of the contract, the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin have been indicated, it is allowed to use materials, devices, software, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software, systems used in the documentation provided by the Ordering Party or their origin, serve only to define the standard and may be replaced by others not worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Any indicated names of products and their producers are not intended to infringe the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies if the Ordering Party has described the subject of the contract by means of 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 characteristics not worse than those given in the technical documentation. In the case of offers containing equivalent solutions, the contracting authority will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the SWZ. The Contractor who refers to solutions equivalent to those described by the Contracting Authority is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by it meet the requirements specified by the Contracting Entity. The contractor shall prove in the tender the equivalence of the devices, software or systems offered. The burden of proving equivalence is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Authority shall not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than those indicated in Annex 2 to the SWZ than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements.

4. Deadline for the contract: up to 30 calendar days from the date of signing the contract.

1. Orthopedic drive.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. Trademarks, proper names, etc. indicated in the documents. – constitute only a quality, functional, technical and technological benchmark relating to the subject-matter of the contract. In all cases in which, due to the specification of the subject of the contract, the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin have been indicated, it is allowed to use materials, devices, software, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software, systems used in the documentation provided by the Ordering Party or their origin, serve only to define the standard and may be replaced by others not worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Any indicated names of products and their producers are not intended to infringe the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies if the Ordering Party has described the subject of the contract by means of 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 characteristics not worse than those given in the technical documentation. In the case of offers containing equivalent solutions, the contracting authority will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the SWZ. The Contractor who refers to solutions equivalent to those described by the Contracting Authority is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by it meet the requirements specified by the Contracting Entity. The contractor shall prove in the tender the equivalence of the devices, software or systems offered. The burden of proving equivalence is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Authority shall not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than those indicated in Annex 2 to the SWZ than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements.

4. Deadline for the contract: up to 30 calendar days from the date of signing the contract.

1. Spine traction device, Stabilometric platform, CPM rail.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. Trademarks, proper names, etc. indicated in the documents. – constitute only a quality, functional, technical and technological benchmark relating to the subject-matter of the contract. In all cases in which, due to the specification of the subject of the contract, the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin have been indicated, it is allowed to use materials, devices, software, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software, systems used in the documentation provided by the Ordering Party or their origin, serve only to define the standard and may be replaced by others not worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Any indicated names of products and their producers are not intended to infringe the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies if the Ordering Party has described the subject of the contract by means of 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 characteristics not worse than those given in the technical documentation. In the case of offers containing equivalent solutions, the contracting authority will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the SWZ. The Contractor who refers to solutions equivalent to those described by the Contracting Authority is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by it meet the requirements specified by the Contracting Entity. The contractor shall prove in the tender the equivalence of the devices, software or systems offered. The burden of proving equivalence is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Authority shall not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than those indicated in Annex 2 to the SWZ than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements.

4. Deadline for the contract: up to 30 calendar days from the date of signing the contract.

1. Laser diodowy.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. Trademarks, proper names, etc. indicated in the documents. – constitute only a quality, functional, technical and technological benchmark relating to the subject-matter of the contract. In all cases in which, due to the specification of the subject of the contract, the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin have been indicated, it is allowed to use materials, devices, software, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software, systems used in the documentation provided by the Ordering Party or their origin, serve only to define the standard and may be replaced by others not worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Any indicated names of products and their producers are not intended to infringe the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies if the Ordering Party has described the subject of the contract by means of 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 characteristics not worse than those given in the technical documentation. In the case of offers containing equivalent solutions, the contracting authority will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the SWZ. The Contractor who refers to solutions equivalent to those described by the Contracting Authority is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by it meet the requirements specified by the Contracting Entity. The contractor shall prove in the tender the equivalence of the devices, software or systems offered. The burden of proving equivalence is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Authority shall not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than those indicated in Annex 2 to the SWZ than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements.

4. Deadline for the contract: up to 30 calendar days from the date of signing the contract.

1. Autorefraktometr.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. Trademarks, proper names, etc. indicated in the documents. – constitute only a quality, functional, technical and technological benchmark relating to the subject-matter of the contract. In all cases in which, due to the specification of the subject of the contract, the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin have been indicated, it is allowed to use materials, devices, software, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software, systems used in the documentation provided by the Ordering Party or their origin, serve only to define the standard and may be replaced by others not worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Any indicated names of products and their producers are not intended to infringe the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies if the Ordering Party has described the subject of the contract by means of 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 characteristics not worse than those given in the technical documentation. In the case of offers containing equivalent solutions, the contracting authority will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the SWZ. The Contractor who refers to solutions equivalent to those described by the Contracting Authority is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by it meet the requirements specified by the Contracting Entity. The contractor shall prove in the tender the equivalence of the devices, software or systems offered. The burden of proving equivalence is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Authority shall not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than those indicated in Annex 2 to the SWZ than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements.

4. Deadline for the contract: up to 30 calendar days from the date of signing the contract.

1. ECG machine, Set for 24h cardiac diagnostics.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. Trademarks, proper names, etc. indicated in the documents. – constitute only a quality, functional, technical and technological benchmark relating to the subject-matter of the contract. In all cases in which, due to the specification of the subject of the contract, the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin have been indicated, it is allowed to use materials, devices, software, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software, systems used in the documentation provided by the Ordering Party or their origin, serve only to define the standard and may be replaced by others not worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Any indicated names of products and their producers are not intended to infringe the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies if the Ordering Party has described the subject of the contract by means of 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 characteristics not worse than those given in the technical documentation. In the case of offers containing equivalent solutions, the contracting authority will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the SWZ. The Contractor who refers to solutions equivalent to those described by the Contracting Authority is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by it meet the requirements specified by the Contracting Entity. The contractor shall prove in the tender the equivalence of the devices, software or systems offered. The burden of proving equivalence is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Authority shall not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than those indicated in Annex 2 to the SWZ than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements.

4. Deadline for the contract: up to 30 calendar days from the date of signing the contract.

1. A set of psychological test equipment.

2. The description of the subject of the contract containing information about the assortment, quantities and its technical and functional parameters is specified in Annex 2 to the SWZ, which is an integral part thereof.

3. Trademarks, proper names, etc. indicated in the documents. – constitute only a quality, functional, technical and technological benchmark relating to the subject-matter of the contract. In all cases in which, due to the specification of the subject of the contract, the origin, names of materials, devices, software, systems or their origin have been indicated, it is allowed to use materials, devices, software, equivalent systems, i.e. all named materials, devices or software, systems used in the documentation provided by the Ordering Party or their origin, serve only to define the standard and may be replaced by others not worse technical, functional, quality, functional and aesthetic parameters, taking into account proper cooperation with other materials, devices and programs. Any indicated names of products and their producers are not intended to infringe the principle of fair competition and equal treatment of contractors. The concept of equivalence also applies if the Ordering Party has described the subject of the contract by means of 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 characteristics not worse than those given in the technical documentation. In the case of offers containing equivalent solutions, the contracting authority will verify them in terms of meeting the requirements of individual items of technical requirements contained in Annex 2 to the SWZ. The Contractor who refers to solutions equivalent to those described by the Contracting Authority is obliged to demonstrate that the supplies offered by it meet the requirements specified by the Contracting Entity. The contractor shall prove in the tender the equivalence of the devices, software or systems offered. The burden of proving equivalence is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contracting Authority shall not recognize equivalent solutions if they are worse than those indicated in Annex 2 to the SWZ than the minimum quality, functional, technical and technological requirements.

4. Deadline for the contract: up to 30 calendar days from the date of signing the contract.