On the Sale of Expired Goods
- 2022-07-28
The claimant was subjected to administrative liability by a decision of the Head of the Administrative Offenses Investigation Division of the Yerevan City Hall, imposing a fine of 200,000 AMD (two hundred thousand AMD).
According to the mentioned decision, the claimant was accused of selling expired goods, including "Raffaello" chocolates, "Masis" brand tea with expired expiration dates, "Bacon" brand lard (in bulk), and "Bacon" brand sausages without an expiration date label.
The court stated that when exercising discretionary powers, the competent authority must, among other things, follow the principle of proportionality. In this regard, the applied measure must be moderate, meaning that a fair balance must exist between the applied measure and the legitimate goal pursued. Accordingly, when imposing a penalty, the nature of the violation, the violator’s personality, degree of fault, financial situation, and aggravating or mitigating circumstances must be taken into account.
The competent administrative body not only must ensure a comprehensive, complete, and objective examination of the facts when considering an administrative offense, but it must also justify why it has chosen that specific penalty in the administrative act. It should be noted that the legal norm imposing the penalty sets a range from a minimum to a maximum amount.
Upon examining the evidence, arguments, and legal positions presented in the case, the court concluded that the materials of the administrative proceedings did not clarify whether the competent administrative body had exercised its discretionary powers in accordance with the principle of proportionality or whether an arbitrary choice had been made by applying the maximum penalty for the act attributed to the claimant. It was also unclear whether the pursued goal could not have been achieved by applying a lesser penalty.
Thus, the court confirmed that the decision adopted by the administrative body was unlawful and, under such circumstances, the claim was upheld, invalidating the adopted decision.
Note:
The decision of the Administrative Court of the Republic of Armenia in case No. VD/1191/05/20 has entered into legal force.