AI-assisted research summary: For covered procurement disputes, the remedies and procedures in this part are the only way to resolve claims; chapter 91 contested case proceedings do not apply.
The procedures and remedies provided for in this part, and the rules adopted by the policy board, shall be the exclusive means available for persons aggrieved in connection with the solicitation or award of a contract, a suspension or debarment proceeding, or in connection with a contract controversy, to resolve their claims or differences. The contested case proceedings set out in chapter 91 shall not apply to protested solicitations and awards, debarments or suspensions, or the resolution of contract controversies. [L Sp 1993, c 8, pt of §2; am L 1997, c 352, §23] Case Notes Procurement code was not relevant to employer's claim for breach of duty of loyalty. 338 F.3d 1082. A protester is entitled to recover attorney's fees incurred in prosecuting its protest if the protester has proven the solicitation was in violation of this code, the contract was awarded in violation of §103D-701(f), and award of contract was in bad faith. 85 H. 431, 946 P.2d 1. This section, the "exclusive remedy" provision of chapter 103D, the public procurement code, barred plaintiff, a sub-consultant, from bringing a lawsuit against the defendant city seeking damages sounding in tort for injury suffered as a result of the city's alleged violations of the code; plaintiff was on notice under the code that it could not, in its own right, bring a direct challenge to the procurement process in the event it disputed the actions of the procurement agency; the legislative scheme encompassed the notion that challenges would be brought by the primary parties in the process--the contractor or prospective bidder or offeror. 121 H. 527 (App.), 221 P.3d 505.