Cancellation of customs administrative fine
a story about how much cash can be brought into Georgia and what to do if customs find you have an “excess” amount
JUST case: court stories
Today we want to share with you one of our recent court stories, which clearly demonstrates why it is so important to fight for your rights even when the situation seems hopeless. This is a vivid example of how persistence and professionalism help achieve justice.
1. Description of the situation
Our client arrived at Kutaisi Airport carrying cash. This happened back in 2022. At the checkpoint, customs officers asked the standard question: "How much money are you bringing?" The client, being absolutely honest, replied: "40,000 dollars!" The customs officers redirected the client to the "declaration" room. However, when the customs officers counted the money, the client additionally showed $ 48,000. They announced: "You don’t have $ 40,000, but $ 48,000! You concealed an amount subject to declaration!" And immediately followed the imposition of administrative liability under an article providing for a fine of 10% of the amount, which amounted to $ 4,800!
2. Client’s options
The client was offered two options: either go to court -which would mean customs holding the money for an indefinite period while proceedings took place- or immediately pay the fine and take the remaining amount. The client chose the second option. However, this did not stop the process of challenging the customs decision. Our task was to protect the client’s right to freely dispose of his lawfully acquired funds and to contest the unfounded recovery.
3. Our actions: defense strategy
We decided to appeal the fine. The client gave us a power of attorney and calmly flew home, entrusting us with resolving the matter.
What was the basis of our defense?
- First attempt: Initially, we tried an administrative appeal by applying to the Revenue Service. Unfortunately, our request was denied.
- Appeal to the Disputes Council: We challenged the decision before the Disputes Council of the Ministry of Finance. Unfortunately, this was also denied.
- Filing in the court of first instance: We did not stop and filed a claim in the first instance -the Tbilisi City Court. However, here too our application was rejected.
- Appellate challenge: Despite previous setbacks, we continued the fight and appealed the decision to the appellate instance. And here, the Court of Appeal issued a positive decision in favor of our client!
What was the basis of our defense?
- Absence of intent: We convincingly proved that the client had no intention to conceal anything. He named the amount approximately and immediately expressed readiness to declare it.
- Doubts about the counting process: The money-counting process took place under cameras. The Revenue Service and the Ministry of Finance provided footage from the cameras in the general hall but did not show footage from the declaration room, stating that it had been deleted. An important factor was that from the very beginning we had requested all documentation and video footage from the administrative proceedings. The administrative bodies, citing the protection of personal data, withheld this data from us, and in court claimed that it had been deleted. This meant that there was no 100% confirmation of the exact amount counted, and it was unclear whether customs officers discovered this themselves or the client disclosed it before the declaration. This became a key argument in our favor, especially because we emphasized that the burden of proof lay on the respondents in this situation. On the one hand, they concealed important evidence from us, and on the other hand, they based their decision on these concealed materials.
4. Result
Our claims were fully satisfied, and the fine was found to be unfounded. The fine amount — the same $ 4,800 — must be returned to the client from the budget, and the court order for this has already been obtained.
Additional information:
- Lawyer for the case: Giorgi Zhuzhunashvili
- Period of proceedings: 2022−2025
- Result: Full satisfaction of claims
- Court that made the decision: Tbilisi Court of Appeal
Was it helpful? Share your opinion
Do you have a task or a question?
MARIA GUSEINOVA
Leading Manager of Commercial Department
Leading Manager of Commercial Department