The article is for informational purposes and does not replace legal advice — for a specific procedure, it is worth consulting a legal counsel specializing in public procurement.
An ambulance is acquired by a hospital, ambulance station, or volunteer fire department unit almost always through public procurement, and not a standard commercial transaction. From January 1, 2026, purchases over PLN 170,000 net are subject to the Public Procurement Law, and the specifics of a rescue vehicle — homologation, standards, medical equipment — create their own repetitive traps when describing the subject of the contract.
Who must apply the Public Procurement Law when purchasing an ambulance and from what amount
The Public Procurement Law must be applied by almost every ambulance purchaser financing the purchase from public funds — a hospital, local government emergency medical service station, municipal or county office, and often also a volunteer fire department benefiting from a subsidy. From January 1, 2026, the basic threshold below which the act is not applied at all is PLN 170,000 net — it increased from PLN 130,000 pursuant to the act of July 25, 2025, amending the Public Procurement Law (Journal of Laws 2025, item 1173). The deciding factor is the date of initiating the procedure, not the date of signing the contract or delivering the vehicle.
Above the national threshold, a second, higher threshold comes into play — the EU threshold. For most ambulance purchasers, i.e., contracting authorities operating below the central level of government administration, this threshold for the years 2026–2027 is EUR 216,000, which at the current exchange rate of PLN 4.31 per euro amounts to PLN 930,960. Both values come from the announcement of the President of the Public Procurement Office of December 8, 2025 (Official Gazette, item 1247). An order for an ambulance is marked with the CPV code 34114121-3 Ambulances — entering it correctly in the notice makes it easier to compare the procedure with similar tenders and speeds up its discovery by contractors.
| Threshold | Amount | Legal basis |
| National Public Procurement Law threshold (from 1.01.2026) | PLN 170,000 net | Journal of Laws 2025, item 1173 |
| EU threshold — supplies, contracting authorities below central level (2026–2027) | EUR 216,000 / PLN 930,960 | Official Gazette, item 1247 |
| Principle of competitiveness — purchases from subsidies (from 25.03.2025) | PLN 80,000 net | Ministry of Funds and Regional Policy Guidelines of 14.03.2025 |
Below the national threshold, the contracting authority is not exempt from responsibility — they must still spend public funds in a purposeful and economical manner, and combining several smaller contracts to artificially circumvent the threshold is treated as a violation of public finance discipline. Above the threshold, formalities increase sharply: publication in the Public Procurement Bulletin, appointing a tender committee, and a full appeal procedure before the National Appeal Chamber.
How to describe the subject of the ambulance contract without restricting competition
The contracting authority cannot describe the subject of the contract by indicating a specific make of chassis or bodywork if this could privilege or eliminate some contractors. This principle is introduced by Art. 99 sec. 4 of the Public Procurement Law, and its violation is among the most common grounds for invalidating procedures for the supply of specialized vehicles.
There is an exception to this rule, but it is narrow. Article 99 sec. 5 allows the indication of a trademark or a specific technical solution only when the contracting authority was unable to describe the subject in a sufficiently precise and understandable manner by other means — and even then, the indication must be accompanied by a reservation allowing equivalent solutions. If the contracting authority uses this exception, Art. 99 sec. 6 imposes an additional obligation on them — they must clearly define the criteria for assessing equivalence, so that a contractor offering a different product knows exactly what they must prove. A general phrasing like “or another with similar parameters” does not meet this requirement.
In the practice of ambulance procurement, the most common mistake is not explicitly mentioning the Volkswagen or Mercedes-Benz brand in the description — this is a rare and easily noticeable violation.
The problem arises more subtly when the technical parameters — wheelbase, specific dimensions of the medical compartment down to the millimeter, permissible weight — are narrowed down so much that in practice only one chassis available on the market meets them. Such a description formally does not indicate a brand, but it results in the same effect of restricting competition. The range of permissible parameters should also be differentiated depending on the type of ambulance — the differences between type A, B, and C, which we described in a separate article on the KG Special Performance blog, translate into different reasonable dimensional and weight brackets for each of them.
The EN 1789 standard in the Terms of Reference and the obligation to allow equivalent solutions
Ambulance homologation in accordance with the EN 1789:2020+A1:2024 standard is a standard element of the description of the subject of the contract in ambulance tenders. It is less often remembered, however, that the mere fact of referring to a standard creates a specific legal obligation on the part of the contracting authority.
Art. 101 sec. 4 of the Public Procurement Law explicitly states that when describing the subject of the contract by reference to a standard, the contracting authority must allow equivalent solutions and explicitly note this in the documentation. The contracting authority cannot, therefore, demand only a vehicle with EN 1789 homologation without this reservation — even if the standard is widely used in the industry and seems to be an obvious minimum. The burden of proof, however, lies on the other side of the table: according to Art. 101 sec. 5 and 6, it is the contractor who must prove in the offer, most often using means of proof — certificates, test reports, declarations of conformity — that the offered vehicle meets the requirements equivalent to the standard, even if formally it does not have the identical designation. The contracting authority cannot reject such an offer merely because it does not bear exactly the same standard symbol that was entered in the Terms of Reference. For ambulance manufacturers, this means a practical consequence — the documentation confirming compliance with the standard should be ready to be submitted together with the offer, and not sent at a later stage, because the deadline for supplementing it depends on whether the contracting authority anticipated such a possibility in the notice at all.
Do high quality requirements restrict competition
No, if the contracting authority can justify them with objective needs. The established jurisprudence of the National Appeal Chamber and courts confirms the right of medical entities to demand parameters higher than the standard ones on the market, when this stems from a real need related to patient safety. The contracting authority must, however, indicate a specific, real need behind the increased requirement — the mere availability on the market of many devices with a similar purpose does not replace such a justification.
This is important information for people preparing the Terms of Reference for an ambulance who are afraid of appeals from contractors. Raising requirements — for example, regarding the strength of the stretcher, the equipment mounting system, or the air filtration class in the medical compartment — is permissible, provided it is accompanied by a specific substantive justification. The risk arises only in the absence of such an explanation as to why this particular parameter is essential. Therefore, it is worthwhile for the tender documentation to include a brief, specific justification for the need behind each increased requirement, and not just the numerical parameter itself.
How does the form of financing affect the procedure for purchasing an ambulance
An ambulance contract is subject to the Public Procurement Law regardless of the form of financing, if the purchaser is an entity obliged to apply it — this applies both to a cash purchase, as well as operational or financial leasing. The form of financing, on the other hand, affects the method of estimating the contract value and some of the contract provisions, for example, regarding responsibility for vehicle homologation during the leasing period. We described the practical comparison of costs and ownership consequences between purchasing and leasing an ambulance in more detail in a separate article on the KG Special Performance blog. The situation is different when the ambulance is financed entirely or partially from EU funds or from the Medical Fund, and the beneficiary of the subsidy is an entity that is not itself a contracting authority within the meaning of the Public Procurement Law — then a separate procedure comes into play, described in the next part of this article. Details on available ambulance fleet co-financing programs, including the Medical Fund, can be found in our article on the ambulance fleet budget.
The principle of competitiveness as a separate path for purchases from subsidies
Volunteer fire departments and other entities that are not contracting authorities within the meaning of the Public Procurement Law, which purchase an ambulance using EU funds, do not apply the Public Procurement Law — they are bound by a separate procedure, known as the principle of competitiveness. From March 25, 2025, the threshold for its application is PLN 80,000 net, after being raised from the previous PLN 50,000 pursuant to the updated Guidelines on the eligibility of expenditures for the years 2021–2027 issued by the Minister of Funds and Regional Policy.
These two paths are sometimes confused, and the difference has real practical significance. The principle of competitiveness requires the publication of a request for proposals in the Competitiveness Base, but it does not impose as formalized a procedure as the full Public Procurement Law regime — for example, there is no mandatory tender committee or such an extensive appeal path. Below the threshold of PLN 80,000 net, the beneficiary of the subsidy should apply the principle of rational expenditure of funds, which in practice means comparing several market offers and documenting the choice, without formally publishing a request.
For a volunteer fire department unit planning to purchase an ambulance with co-financing, it is crucial to determine at the very beginning what legal regime it operates in — whether as a subsidy beneficiary it is subject to the principle of competitiveness, or whether as a local government unit it must apply the full Public Procurement Law. Confusing these two paths is sometimes one of the most common reasons for an expenditure being questioned by the financing institution.
The most common mistakes in ambulance tenders and their consequences
Mistakes in the description of the subject of the contract rarely result from the bad will of the contracting authority — most often it is the effect of copying the specifications from a previous tender without updating it to the current legal status or real needs. The consequences, however, can be costly, because the invalidation of the procedure or a successful appeal to the National Appeal Chamber means a delay in the delivery of a vehicle that realistically affects the unit’s ability to provide assistance.
- Indicating technical parameters that are so narrow that they are met by only one chassis available on the market, without justification by objective need.
- Referring to the EN 1789 standard without a note about allowing equivalent solutions, which violates Art. 101 sec. 4 of the Public Procurement Law.
- Lack of clearly defined criteria for assessing equivalence, which means the contractor does not know how to prove the compliance of their offer.
- Artificially dividing the contract into smaller parts to avoid the Public Procurement Law threshold or the principle of competitiveness.
- Confusing the legal regime in subsidized purchases — applying the principle of competitiveness where the full Public Procurement Law procedure is required, and vice versa.
The consequence of each of these errors may be an appeal to the National Appeal Chamber, filed by a contractor who considers that the description of the subject of the contract discriminates against them. If the National Appeal Chamber agrees with them, the contracting authority must change the documentation and repeat part of the procedure, which, in the case of purchasing a life-saving vehicle, means a real delay measured in weeks.
FAQ
From January 1, 2026, the basic threshold for applying the Public Procurement Law is PLN 170,000 net.
Ambulances are marked with the CPV code 34114121-3. In tender documentation, it is sometimes supplemented with related codes, for example regarding medical equipment or rescue equipment, if the contract covers more than just the vehicle itself.
As a rule, no, because this violates Art. 99 sec. 4 of the Public Procurement Law. An exception is permitted by Art. 99 sec. 5, but only when the subject of the contract cannot be described in any other, sufficiently precise manner. In such a situation, the contracting authority must additionally stipulate the admission of equivalent solutions and clearly define the criteria for their assessment, in accordance with Art. 99 sec. 6.
It depends on the legal status of the beneficiary and the source of financing — if the volunteer fire department is not a contracting authority within the meaning of the Public Procurement Law, and the purchase is financed from EU funds, the principle of competitiveness with a threshold of PLN 80,000 net applies, and not the full Public Procurement Law regime.
The burden of proof rests on the contractor — they must demonstrate in the offer, most often using means of proof, that the offered vehicle meets the requirements equivalent to the standard indicated by the contracting authority.
The contracting authority must repeat the procedure from the stage at which the violation occurred, which means a new notice and a new deadline for submitting offers. When purchasing a life-saving vehicle, such a delay is severe — sometimes measured in months if the case went to the National Appeal Chamber earlier.
