Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 279A.225 (2026)

Protests and disputes

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      279A.225 Protests and disputes. (1) A protest regarding the procurement process, the contents of solicitation documents or the award or proposed award of an original contract may be directed only to the administering contracting agency. The protest must be in accordance with the provisions of ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425.

      (2) A protest regarding the use of a cooperative procurement by a purchasing contracting agency after the execution of an original contract may be directed only to the purchasing contracting agency. The protest must be in accordance with the provisions of ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425 and is limited in scope to the purchasing contracting agency’s authority to enter into a cooperative procurement contract.

      (3) The decision of a local contracting agency to use a cooperative procurement is reviewable in the circuit court of the county where the principal offices of the local contracting agency are located. The decision of a state contracting agency to use a cooperative procurement shall be reviewable by the Circuit Court for Marion County or the circuit court of the county where the principal offices of the state contracting agency are located.

      (4) Disputes regarding contract performance between a purchasing contracting agency and a contractor may be resolved solely by the purchasing contracting agency and the contractor. [2003 c.794 §30]

 

STATE SURPLUS PROPERTY

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452), 567 P.3d 1040 (Or. 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452), 567 P.3d 1040 (Or. 2025). “ORS 279A.225(1). ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425, in turn, include pro- visions for judicial review.”
Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452), 373 Or. 405 (Or. 2025). “ORS 279A.225(1). ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425, in turn, include pro- visions for judicial review.”
Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452), 373 Or. 405 (Or. 2025). “ORS 279A.225(1). ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425, in turn, include provisions for judicial review.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 279A.225(1): 3 cases
Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452), 567 P.3d 1040 (Or. 2025). “ORS 279A.225(1). ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425, in turn, include pro- visions for judicial review.”
Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452), 373 Or. 405 (Or. 2025). “ORS 279A.225(1). ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425, in turn, include pro- visions for judicial review.”
Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452), 373 Or. 405 (Or. 2025). “ORS 279A.225(1). ORS 279B.400 to 279B.425, in turn, include provisions for judicial review.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.