What Article 49 is about and when it is applied
Article 49 of the Georgian Administrative Offences Code concerns the unauthorised occupation of land on territories with a special status — the forest territory of Georgia and the boundaries of protected areas. The norm is divided into two parts, and the division is reflected directly in the price: unauthorised occupation of land on forest territory carries a fine of 200 lari, while within the boundaries of a protected area it carries a fine of 400 lari. If you have been fined under this article, the first thing to be clear about is under which part your case was classified: one and the same described act triggers two different amounts depending on where it took place.
This page explains what the article says, how its two parts differ, and which questions remain outside its frame — so that you can form a clear position towards the penalty document and turn to a specialist in good time.
The two parts of the offence: forest and protected area
The first part of the article deals with the unauthorised occupation of land within the forest territory of Georgia and provides a fine of 200 lari. The second part deals with unauthorised occupation of land within the boundaries of a protected area and provides a fine of 400 lari. The amounts are fixed: no range is written in this article, and that is an important difference — the authority here has no latitude in choosing the amount; its only question is the correct determination of the territory.
The delineation of the territories — what falls within forest territory and where the boundary of a protected area runs — is not explained by this article; it is governed by other normative acts and the corresponding cadastral data. Very often the central question of the case is exactly this: whether the occupied land truly lay within these territories, or whether the case stands somewhere along the boundary line.
What unauthorised occupation means
The article is built on factual appropriation: taking a piece of land into one's own use where no lawful basis for doing so exists. In practice this often looks like cultivating land, putting up a fence, starting construction or appropriating the territory in some other way where it is not permitted. The article gives no stand-alone definition of the concept — what counts as occupation and what does not is assessed from the concrete facts of the case.
There is also one common misunderstanding worth clearing up: Article 49 rests on the status of the territory, not on who owns the land under other registrations. The case must be assessed in relation to a correctly defined territory, and that is precisely the point at which a specialist's involvement reorders the file.
After the fine: what the article does not say
In both parts, Article 49 contains only the act and the amount. It does not say who draws up the offence record, what deadlines apply to payment and to challenging the decision, or what happens to the occupied land afterwards. These questions are governed by the general norms of the Code and by the documents of the case. The small size of the fine often tempts people to leave the matter unattended — bear in mind that a recorded breach does not disappear by itself, and its consequences remain in the documents.
How a lawyer helps and what to bring
A lawyer will check whether the territory within which the offence was held to have been committed was correctly determined; whether the chosen part and amount correspond to the place where the occupation factually occurred; whether any basis for using the land existed; and whether the procedural rules were observed when the record was drawn up. For a consultation, bring:
- the penalty decision or act, in which the territory and the location should be indicated;
- your identity document;
- any documents connected with the land — permissions, notices, correspondence;
- photographs and other evidence relating to the location or to the fact of use of the land.