Appeal of burdensome administrative acts
Investors have drawn attention to situations where they are burdened, which seriously worsen the situation.
The current legislation, including the PC, establishes a list of cases when it is in relation to business entities that state control can be carried out and an exceptional list of cases when, as a result of such control, consequences in the form of administrative penalties may occur.
However, there is a gap in the legislation on bringing business entities to administrative responsibility. Appealing their actions in court does not give results.
In particular, the prosecutor's office conducts an analysis of the company's activities and, upon completion, submits to the environmental authorities a proposal to eliminate violations of the law with a recommendation to take action against such an enterprise.
The usual procedure for conducting state control would significantly limit the powers of government agencies to hold enterprises accountable.
In this case, the environmental authorities take advantage of the lack of clarity in the legislation and immediately after receiving the submission, they initiate cases of administrative offenses.
At the same time, it should be noted that in accordance with the Constitutional Law "On the Prosecutor's Office", the submission is a document that is mandatory only for consideration, but not for execution, and according to the provisions of the Criminal Code, cases of administrative offenses can be initiated in certain cases and after an inspection in accordance with the established procedure.
Thus, the representation of the Prosecutor's Office is not an onerous act that can be challenged in an administrative court.
At the same time, appealing against the actions of environmental authorities when an administrative offense case is initiated is also practically impossible; due to the short time frame for considering such cases according to the rules of the Administrative Code.
At the same time, the existing procedure for suspending such cases is not always maintained by government agencies.
Determination of jurisdiction
The dispute between the courts of first instance located in different regions, cities of republican significance and the capital is resolved by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan upon the submission of the relevant regional or equivalent court (Part 2 of Article 109 of the CPC).
Defendants in investment disputes
The defendant is "an administrative body or official who is being sued in court" (paragraph 15, part 1, Article 4 of the CPC). In turn, the administrative body according to subclause 7) of the first part of Article 4 of the APPC is a state body, a local government body, a state legal entity, as well as another organization that, in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan, are authorized to adopt an administrative act, commit an administrative act (inaction).
The defendant is "an administrative body or official who is being sued in court" (paragraph 15, part 1, Article 4 of the CPC). In turn, the administrative body according to subclause 7) of the first part of Article 4 of the APPC is a state body, a local government body, a state legal entity, as well as another organization that, in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan, are authorized to adopt an administrative act, commit an administrative act (inaction).
Refunds of claims
Refunds for administrative claims are carried out on the grounds provided for in the second part of Article 138 of the CPC.
The basis (subparagraph, part two of Article 138 of the CPC)
2) the claim does not comply with the requirements of the second part of Article 131 of this Code
5) there is a dispute between the same parties in the proceedings of the same or another court.
6) the plaintiff has withdrawn the filed claim
9) the parties have concluded an agreement on reconciliation, mediation or dispute settlement
11) the case is not subject to consideration in the order of administrative proceedings
15) the court refused to restore the missed deadline
17) the case is beyond the jurisdiction of this court
A large number of refunds based on subparagraphs 11) and 17) of the second part of Article 138 of the CPC are related to errors made by plaintiffs when filing civil lawsuits with the SMAS.
In accordance with the second part of Article 5 of the CPC, the task of administrative proceedings is the fair, impartial and timely resolution of administrative cases in order to effectively protect and restore violated or disputed rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of individuals, rights and legitimate interests of legal entities in public relations.
It is important to note that public law relations arise between subjects of law in connection with the exercise by one of the participants of his powers in relation to the other.
If we are talking about challenging the terms of a contract, which is a civil contract, then the state body acts in it as a party to the contract and is not associated with the exercise of authority.
Consequently, such cases are considered in civil proceedings.
For example, SMAS returned the claim, stating that "the defendant's refusal is not an onerous act, does not contain an authoritative expression of will, and is not aimed at the emergence, modification, and termination of the plaintiff's rights and obligations arising from public law relations.
In these circumstances, the claim should be returned, regardless of the wording of the claims, as not subject to consideration in administrative proceedings" (No. 7194-23-00-4/1127).
Or in another case, SMAS noted that "the plaintiff's claims in this case do not relate to public law relations, the plaintiff's claims are based on the terms of the Contract concluded between the parties.
The plaintiff disputes the defendant's refusal to extend the Contract.
Therefore, if there is an investment contract with the State, this dispute cannot be the subject of an administrative claim.
Based on the above, the court considers that the claim is not subject to consideration in administrative proceedings" (No. 7194-23 00-4/675). This is the issue that accounts for the largest number of refunds.
It is described in more detail in section 4.1 of this analysis.
We also note the following regarding the relatively low level of administrative claims. According to Part 1 of Article 120 of the CPC, reconciliation of the parties is allowed if the defendant has administrative discretion, which is the authority of an administrative body or official to make one of the possible decisions based on an assessment of their legality, for the purposes and limits established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
In this regard, the CPC does not oblige the judge to take measures to reconcile the parties, as established by Part 1 of Article 174 of the CPC.
This causes a difference in the number of reconciliations in administrative and civil cases.
In the future, it should be borne in mind that if the concept of an administrative contract is introduced into the APPC, appropriate changes will affect the reconciliation mechanism.
Abbreviations used
1) APPC – Administrative Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
2) CPC – The Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
3) Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
4) PC – Business Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
5) NP VS – Normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
6) NC – The Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
7) SCAD of the Astana City Court - the judicial board for administrative cases of the Astana City Court;
8) SCAD VS – judicial board for administrative cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
9) SMAS – Specialized Interdistrict Administrative Court;
10) SMEC – Specialized Interdistrict Economic Court;
11) The CGO is a central government agency.
Used regulatory sources
The rules of substantive law, which were guided by the courts when considering investment disputes, include the legislative acts currently in force.
The main regulatory legal acts regulating the issues of disputes of the generalized category are:
1) The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
2) The Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 27, 1994 No. 268-XIII;
3) Business Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 29, 2015 No. 375-V;
4) The Administrative Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
5) The Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
6) Land Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated June 20, 2003 No. 442;
7) Budget Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 4, 2008 No. 95-IV;
8) The Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 25, 2017 No. 120-VI "On Taxes and other mandatory payments to the Budget" (Tax Code), etc.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
