Source: Unknown Author: Time: 20 10/08/ 10 Recommended project construction lawyer: land development contract, real estate project bidding "> The question here is still whether the defects in the tender are acceptable. There is no mandatory provision on seals in the Bidding Law. Before the promulgation of the Bidding Law, Article 22 of China's Interim Provisions on Tendering and Bidding of Construction Projects stipulated that the tender without the seal of the unit and the person in charge was invalid. Land development contract, housing tender, real estate project "> The question here is still whether the defects in the tender are acceptable. There is no mandatory provision on seals in the Bidding Law. Before the promulgation of the Bidding Law, Article 22 of China's Interim Provisions on Tendering and Bidding of Construction Projects stipulated that the tender without the seal of the unit and the person in charge was invalid. Article 32 of the Measures for the Administration of Bidding for Construction also stipulates; "Without the seal of the unit and the legal representative or the agent entrusted by the legal representative", the bid is invalid. The above laws and regulations clearly stipulate that the tender should be stamped with the corresponding seal, and clearly stipulate that the absence of the corresponding seal is one of the 3-5 invalid reasons for the tender. However, various situations may be encountered in the actual bidding process. It would be a pity if a tender is excellent in all aspects and is excluded just because it is not stamped. It is not worthwhile for the owner to lose a good contractor. Therefore, when making a judgment, the court should also apply relevant laws and regulations appropriately and flexibly. In a project bidding, the contractor did not have a personal signature in the tender, so the owner rejected the tender. The court rejected the owner's decision and held that the contractor's failure to sign the tender was a slight defect, which could be forgiven, because the tender guarantee had the contractor's autograph in the appendix to the tender. We believe that the judgment in this case has been handled very flexibly. I think it is appropriate.