Challenging the actions of police officers for traffic violations, orders for the payment of fines recorded by certified devices, as well as appeals by individuals (sole proprietors) and law firms of protocols on administrative offenses in the field of taxation
When studying judicial acts, it was revealed that most of the complaints were related to individuals challenging the actions of police departments for traffic violations, orders to pay fines recorded by certified devices, as well as appeals by individuals (sole proprietors) and law firms against protocols on administrative offenses in the field of taxation. The complaints were mostly satisfied on the following grounds: - recognition of illegal actions (inaction) of the body (official) conducting proceedings on an administrative offense; - significant violation of procedural rules; - illegal registration of procedural documents. On January 27, 2017, the Administrative Court of the city of Pavlodar, having considered the administrative case against IP E. under part 1 of Article 149 of the Administrative Code, decided to terminate the proceedings due to the absence of elements of an administrative offense in his actions. According to the protocol on an administrative offense dated November 17, 2016, during the period from October 14, 2016 to November 16-17, 2016, employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the city of Aksu of the Department of Internal Affairs of the Pavlodar region during an inspection for anti-terrorist protection of the Dostyk-1, Dostyk-2, Dostyk-3 trading houses,Kameya and Agidel, located in the city of Aksu at 8 and 11 Entuziastov Streets, 41 and 43 Auezova Streets, 9 and 12 Astana Streets, respectively, violations of E.'s improper performance of duties to comply with the requirements for UTO facilities belonging to him were revealed. In relation to E. Three administrative cases were initiated under part 1 of Article 149 of the Administrative Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which were sent at his request to the Administrative Police of the city of Pavlodar for consideration at the offender's place of residence. By the court's ruling, the three cases were combined into one proceeding.
The IP representative stated during the trial that the inspection was carried out with gross violations of the procedure for conducting inspections of compliance by managers or other officials of UTO facilities. Before the start of the inspection, the inspection appointment certificates were not served, and the inspection results report was not drawn up. He asked to recognize the instructions sent to E., as well as the checklists for checking the facilities, as inadmissible as evidence in the case as drawn up in violation of the norms of current legislation, and to terminate the proceedings. The court found that the instructions were made in gross violation of the procedure for conducting inspections of compliance by managers or other officials of the facilities of the UTO, regardless of the forms of ownership, established measures, and recognized them and the checklists for checking the facilities as unacceptable evidence. By virtue of the provisions of part 5 of Article 765 of the Administrative Code, the proceedings were terminated.
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
