On Amendments to the Administrative Procedure Code of Georgia

On Amendments to the Administrative Procedure Code of Georgia

Law of Georgia

On Amendments to the Administrative Procedure Code of Georgia

The Parliament of Georgia enacts:

Article 1🔗

The Administrative Procedure Code of Georgia (Legislative Herald of Georgia, No 39(46), 1999, Art. 190) shall be supplemented with Chapter VII¹ of the following content:

“Chapter VII1

Administrative proceedings related to the inspection of an entrepreneur's activity

Article 21¹. Judge's order on the inspection of an entrepreneur's activity🔗

An order on the inspection of an entrepreneur's activity shall be issued, on the basis of a motion of the controlling body, by a judge of the district (city) court at the entrepreneur's location.

Article 21². Motion of the controlling body🔗

1. A motion of the controlling body shall be submitted to the judge before the start of the inspection of the entrepreneur.

2. In the event that an immediate and direct threat may be created to state security, human life or health, or to evidence, the controlling body shall be entitled to suspend the enterprise's activity in the part of the subject of inspection and immediately apply to the judge with a motion. If the suspension of the enterprise's activity is impossible or it will cause significant damage to the enterprise, or the entrepreneur demands this, the controlling body shall be entitled to start the inspection of the entrepreneur and, within 24 hours, apply to the judge with a corresponding motion. When submitting the motion, the controlling body must substantiate what the urgent necessity of the inspection consisted in.

3. A motion of the controlling body on the inspection of an entrepreneur's activity must contain sufficient grounds for issuing an order. The motion shall indicate the exact data of the entrepreneur who is to be inspected, the term, nature and scope of the inspection. The motion shall also be accompanied by a copy of the certificate of registration of the controlling body in the state register.

Article 21³. Rule for deciding the issue of inspection of an entrepreneur's activity🔗

1. A judge shall make a decision on the basis of a motion of the controlling body within 24 hours from the submission of the motion.

2. A judge shall consider the motion of the controlling body single-handedly at an open court hearing. The representative of the controlling body and the entrepreneur whose activity inspection is requested by the controlling body, or his/her representative, shall participate in the court hearing.

3. A judge shall have the right to summon and question a person whose testimony (information) substantiates the motion, to propose to the controlling body submitting the motion and to the entrepreneur to present the documents and material evidence necessary for verifying the substantiation of the motion.

4. After opening the court hearing, the judge shall announce what motion is being considered, name the participants in the proceedings, and determine whether there are recusals. The representative of the controlling body who submitted the motion shall substantiate it, after which he/she shall answer the questions of the judge and the entrepreneur or his/her legal representative. Non-appearance of the parties shall not cause postponement of the consideration of the motion.

5. If the entrepreneur or his/her legal representative participates in the court hearing, he/she shall be given the opportunity to give explanations and formulate opposing opinions.

6. A record shall be drawn up at the court hearing. After verifying the substantiation of the motion, the judge shall issue an order on the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity. If there are no formal and factual grounds for inspecting the entrepreneur's activity, the judge shall issue a reasoned ruling on refusal to inspect the entrepreneur's activity. If the inspection of the entrepreneur has already begun, the ruling shall indicate the termination of the inspection and compensation for damage caused to the entrepreneur (if the damage occurred as a result of culpable action of the controlling body).

7. The judge's order on the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity shall indicate:

a) the date and place of drawing up the order;

b) the surname of the judge;

c) the controlling body that applied to the judge with the motion;

d) the instruction on the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity, its essence, and the entrepreneur whose inspection is being carried out;

e) the term of validity of the order and of the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity, which shall not exceed 15 days;

f) the official or body authorized to execute the order;

g) the judge's signature and the court seal.

8. The judge's ruling on refusal to inspect the entrepreneur's activity shall indicate:

a) the date and place of drawing up the ruling;

b) the surname of the judge;

c) the controlling body that applied to the judge with the motion;

d) the instruction on refusal to inspect the entrepreneur's activity with the relevant reasoning, and the entrepreneur whose inspection was refused;

e) the official or body that must execute the ruling;

f) the judge's signature and seal.

9. A judge's order or resolution shall be drawn up in three copies, of which one shall be sent to the controlling body submitting the motion, the second – to the respective entrepreneur or his legal representative, and the third shall remain with the court.

10. The entrepreneur or his legal representative shall be entitled to apply, by way of a motion to revoke the judge's order on the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity, to the court by whose judge's order the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity is being conducted. The motion shall be considered in accordance with the procedure established by this Article.

11. When a judge issues a resolution refusing the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity, the controlling body shall be entitled to apply to the court with a motion for the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity only if an additional circumstance has emerged which was not known to the judge at the time of issuing the resolution and which requires the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity.

12. A motion of the controlling body for the extension of the term of the inspection of the entrepreneur's activity shall be considered in accordance with the procedure established by this Article.

13. The person submitting the motion shall be entitled, during the consideration of the motion in court, to withdraw it before the judge retires to the deliberation room. Re-submission of the motion on the same grounds shall not be permitted.

14. A judge's order may be appealed to the Regional Court.".

Article 2🔗

This Law shall enter into force on the 15th day after publication.

President of Georgia

Eduard Shevardnadze.

Tbilisi,

8 June 2001.

No. 925_IIs