The alleged violation of operating a public catering business was not confirmed: the court invalidated the administrative penalty decision
- 2025-04-18
The Municipality of Yerevan had issued a decision imposing an administrative penalty on the director of our client company, attributing to them a violation for operating a public catering business without the necessary permit. This decision was based on Article 169.16, Part 7 of the RA Code on Administrative Offenses.We submitted a claim to the RA Administrative Court disputing the legality of the decision on several essential grounds.
Absence of an administrative offense
As early as 2019, the same administrative body had prepared a report based on the same alleged offense. However, the proceedings regarding our client had already been terminated by the head of the administrative district on the grounds of lack of offense. Issuing a new decision based on the same facts and circumstances contradicts the law.
Unjustified application of the maximum fine
Moreover, the administrative body failed to provide any reasoning as to why the maximum fine was applied. The RA Code on Administrative Offenses requires clear justification for such decisions, taking into account mitigating and aggravating circumstances. These were completely absent in the case. The court confirmed that such an approach was unlawful and violated the principle of discretionary power.
Procedural violations
Several serious procedural violations were recorded during the proceedings, including:
• The report was not signed by the alleged offender,
• The report was signed by an official lacking the proper authority.
This meant that our client was not properly informed of their rights and was deprived of the opportunity for effective legal protection, as required by Article 267 of the RA Code on Administrative Offenses.
Court ruling
After evaluating all the submitted evidence and legal arguments, the court concluded that the decision to impose an administrative penalty was made in violation of both legal grounds and due process. As a result, the court ruled that the decision made by the administrative body should be declared invalid.
Notice:
The judgment rendered by the RA Administrative Court in Case No. VD/1473/05/23 has entered into legal force