Rendering soil and water unfit during subsoil use in high-mountain regions (Art. 51⁴)

Loading…

How much is the fine in lari?

Article 51⁴ does not state any amount in lari. It sets a range of 50 to 100 minimum amounts of labour remuneration, and the specific figure is settled within that range in the proceedings. The sum written into your decision therefore has to be derived from that unit, which makes checking the calculation a sensible first step.

Only the water was affected, not the soil. Does the article still apply?

The text names soil and water together and does not itself say whether deterioration of only one of them suffices. That means the point is decided on the facts of the case and the qualification may genuinely be contestable. Where this arises, what the sampling and measurement documents actually show becomes the decisive material.

A contractor carried out the works. Who is liable?

The article does not separately allocate liability between the party commissioning the works and the contractor; it addresses soil and water being rendered unfit during the use of useful minerals. The question is therefore resolved on who actually performed the works and on what the contract provided, which makes the contracts and the acts of completed works the central documents in that dispute.

Will restoring the site cancel the fine?

Article 51⁴ provides no exemption from the fine on the basis of restoration works — it sets only a range. Documented evidence of the measures carried out still forms part of the case file, and it may bear on where within that range the sanction is fixed.

5 min·22 Aug 2026

What Article 51⁴ prohibits

Article 51⁴ of the Georgian Code of Administrative Offences is written as a single sentence: rendering soil and water unfit during the use of useful minerals in high-mountain regions attracts a fine. The brevity is deceptive: because the provision defines almost nothing, every question in such a case moves onto the facts and the evidence rather than onto the interpretation of the wording.

The article does not narrow the circle of liable persons by organisational or legal form, and it does not set out separate categories for companies and for individuals. It is framed around the conduct: what matters is whether the described consequence occurred during subsoil use, and to whom it can be attributed.

The wording repays attention on one further point: the article speaks of soil and water being rendered unfit during the use of useful minerals. The link between the works and the result is therefore part of the composition itself, not an additional aggravating circumstance — which makes it a separate factual question, settled on the materials of the particular case.

Rendering soil and water unfit during subsoil use in high-mountain regions (Art. 51⁴)