What Article 150¹ governs and how Article 150³ differs from it
Article 150¹ of the Code of Administrative Offences of Georgia protects the appearance of territory within the administrative boundaries of a municipality: it punishes its unauthorised change, including a change of the colour of a building, as well as the unauthorised mounting or placement of light structures — ventilation systems, ATMs, laundry dryers, grilles, kiosks, stalls. Article 150³ addresses the same acts in relation to the appearance of the Tbilisi municipality and sets a higher sanction in the basic composition.
The structure of both articles is identical: the unauthorised change of appearance, its aggravation in a cultural heritage protection zone, a separate composition for light structures, and a non-correction mechanism. The first question of the case is again territorial: where the act took place.
Sanctions under Article 150¹
Under the first part of Article 150¹ the unauthorised change of the appearance of territory, including a change of the colour of a facade, entails a fine of 200 GEL. The same act in a cultural heritage protection zone — 5,000 GEL. The unauthorised mounting or placement of a light structure is 500 GEL for a physical person and 1,000 GEL for a legal person, an institution or an organisation; in a heritage zone that act is punished with 5,000 GEL. And where a breach covered by the article is not corrected within 20 days of the fine, a fine of 1,500 GEL is imposed.
Sanctions under Article 150³ — Tbilisi
In Tbilisi the basic composition is considerably more expensive: the unauthorised change of appearance, including the colour of a facade, is punished with 500 GEL. In a heritage protection zone — 5,000 GEL. The unauthorised mounting or placement of a light structure is 500 GEL for a physical person and 1,000 GEL for a legal person; in a heritage zone — 5,000 GEL. Non-correction within 20 days of the fine entails a fine of 1,500 GEL.
What a change of appearance means in practice
The notion of appearance is broad: it embraces both the finishing of a facade and any change of the visual state of a territory. The article expressly names the change of a building's colour — painting a building arbitrarily, without the corresponding right, is assessed under this very article. The list of light structures is concrete as well: ventilation systems, ATMs, dryers, grilles, kiosks, stalls and other similar elements — their installation in outdoor space requires an appropriate decision.
For a business this means: before installing the external element of an ATM or a display, before repainting a facade, or before arranging a terrace, it must be checked whether a legal basis for it exists. Otherwise the consequence is twofold — the fine, and, if the structure remains uncorrected, a further 1,500 GEL.
The non-correction mechanics
In both articles the twenty-day period plays the same role: it is the window within which the consequence of the breach — the changed appearance or the mounted structure — must be corrected. If that does not happen, the 1,500 GEL fine applies automatically, and it comes on top of the first one. The practical conclusion: dismantling the structure or restoring the facade matters more than paying the fine.
How we can help
The lawyers of legal.ge will assess the qualification of the act — which article and part apply — verify the fact of a heritage zone and the correction periods, defend you before the reviewing authority and prepare an appeal. For a consultation, bring the fine decision, photographs of the facade or structure, ownership or lease documents, and your identity or registration documents.
What a lawyer checks and how the defence is built
The defence in this category of cases unfolds along several lines. The first is the fact of arbitrariness: whether a legal basis for the act existed — a decision, a permit or an agreement that would have made the change or the mounting lawful. The second is the territorial and zoning angle: whether the act took place in Tbilisi and in a heritage protection zone, because the answers to those two questions change the fine several times over. The third is procedural: how the act is described in the record and whether the twenty-day period was counted correctly.
In non-correction episodes a separate emphasis falls on what „correction“ means in the concrete case: returning the facade to its original colour, dismantling the structure, or another act. Where the record leaves that demand indeterminate, the person has no clear idea of what must be done — and that is a good ground for appeal.
Ultimately, the fines under these articles range from 200 to 5,000 GEL — a twenty-five-fold difference depending entirely on the qualification. A precise legal assessment here always saves more than it costs.