What Article 55² is about and who it applies to
Article 55² of the Georgian Administrative Offences Code protects state-owned land from unauthorised appropriation. The norm covers two forms, and the wording joining them — "and/or" — matters: the offence is the unauthorised occupation of a plot of state-owned land, the use of land without a right of land use, or both together. If you have been fined under this article, the authority's position is that you occupied or have been using state land without the permission or the right to do so.
This page helps you understand what the article says exactly, what fines it provides for, and what it does not say. Land cases are emotional, because they often concern a plot that has been worked in fact for years; but for that very reason the facts and the documents must be assessed coolly — that is the only way to strengthen your position in the face of a fine.
The two forms of the offence: occupation and use without a right
The first form — unauthorised occupation of a plot — means the factual appropriation of state land in circumstances where no permission for it exists. The second form — use without a right of land use — means that a person exploits the land while holding no right of land use at all. The "and/or" in the article indicates that the offence may exist in either form or in their combination.
When use becomes lawful and which document confirms a right of land use is not detailed in this article; those questions are governed by other norms of land law. Very often the first and central question of the case is exactly this: whether you hold a basis that makes your use of the land lawful. The answer lies in documents, not in how long you have been using the plot in fact.
The fines: 1,000–2,000 lari, and 3,000–3,500 on a repeat
For a first offence Article 55² provides a fine of 1,000 to 2,000 lari. The same act committed repeatedly carries a fine of 3,000 to 3,500 lari. The ranges are clearly separated: once the act is treated as a repeat, the fine starts at 3,000 lari — above the maximum for a first offence — and the case takes on a wholly different financial weight.
What counts as a repeat, and how the amount within the range is selected, the article does not explain: the former is defined by other norms of the Code, the latter depends on the assessment of the authority. Both can be examined, and that is precisely where a lawyer's work lies.
What Article 55² does not say
The article contains only the description of the offence and the sanction. It does not say who draws up the record, what deadlines apply to payment and to challenging the decision, whether the fine is accompanied by an obligation to vacate the plot, or how the fact of the breach is to be established. All of that is governed by other norms and by the documents in your case. Do not build your plan on the text of the article alone: every page that arrived together with the fine is as important as the norm itself.
One piece of advice that always holds in this category of cases: whatever the fine, do not continue using the land in the form for which you are being punished — that raises the risk of a repeat, and a repeat moves the fine into a sharply higher range. At the same time, keep every document that evidences your connection with the plot: at later stages of the case, facts can be restored only on paper.
How a lawyer helps and what to bring
A lawyer will examine the case along several lines: whether the plot is genuinely state property; whether you hold a document that gives your occupation or use a lawful basis; whether the breach is correctly dated and classified; whether the case has been treated as a repeat; and whether the procedural rules were observed. For a consultation, bring:
- the penalty decision or act, with its plans and descriptions;
- your identity document or the company's registration documents;
- every paper related to the plot — contracts, decisions, extracts, notices and correspondence;
- photographs and information about witnesses, if there is evidence of long-standing use of the land.
