Everyone's Share: Subjective Division of Responsibility for the Same Administrative Offense
- Jeyhun Asadov
- Lawyer

This blog post will explore the issue of the liability of legal entities in light of the legislation on administrative offenses and a decision by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Azerbaijan.
The Administrative Offenses Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan, specifically Article 192.1, regulates the responsibility of employers when individuals are hired without a legally effective employment contract. This provision allows for both the penalization of responsible officials and legal entities.
For example, an employee starts working at “A” Limited Liability Company (LLC) on August 1, 2022, but the employment contract is signed on August 10, 2024. In this case, the director of the company is held accountable as an official and fined 3,000 AZN. Additionally, proceedings are initiated against “A” LLC as a legal entity, resulting in a 20,000 AZN fine.
This situation raises questions about the relationship between the liability of legal entities and the violations committed by their representatives. It is clear that individuals can only be involved in any work without a legally effective employment contract by specific individuals or officials.
So, how is the issue of guilt and liability of legal entities resolved in this case?
As seen in the example, both the official and the legal entity are held liable for the same administrative offense. Initially, this creates the impression of a violation of the principle of fairness, as it appears that there is double punishment for the same offense.
Does this contradict Article 9.2 of the Administrative Offenses Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan?
According to this provision, “No one can be held administratively liable twice for the same administrative offense.” Moreover, only a person found guilty of committing an administrative offense and whose actions (or omissions) meet all other characteristics of the offense can be held administratively liable (Article 3, Administrative Offenses Code).
So, can the legal entity be considered guilty of the offense described in Article 192.1 of the Administrative Offenses Code?
The general answer to the questions mentioned above largely depends on how the legislation is interpreted. An official interpretation can be found in the Plenum decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated January 12, 2023, concerning the joint interpretation of Articles 17, 18.2, and 18.3 of the Administrative Offenses Code.
The decision addresses the issue of the guilt of legal entities as follows: “In theory, guilt is defined as the psychological attitude of a person toward a socially dangerous act and its consequences, in the form of intent or negligence. Guilt consists of psychological elements such as awareness and will, which represent the intellectual and volitional aspects of socially dangerous behavior.
However, since the subjects of administrative offenses are different—namely, individuals, officials, and legal entities—the general principles of legislation in this area are applied considering the unique characteristics of these subjects. Legal entities lack the psychological elements associated with guilt, making their liability different from that of individuals or officials.
An analysis of the relevant provisions of the Administrative Offenses Code leads to the conclusion that the guilt of a legal entity is closely related to, though not identical to, the guilt of its representative who caused the administrative offense. Categories such as ‘intent’ or ‘awareness’ are not characteristic of a legal entity. Thus, a legal entity’s liability for an administrative offense is determined in connection with the liability of its officials.
The liability of a legal entity for an administrative offense arises in any case as a result of the unlawful behavior of its officials or employees. The guilt is derived from the failure of the official authorized to represent the legal entity, make decisions on its behalf, or supervise its activities, as well as from the negligence of such officials in overseeing the actions of employees.”
Therefore, the Constitutional Court clarifies that while a legal entity’s guilt is not identical to that of its officials, there is a close connection between the two, and the guilt of the legal entity is derived from that of its officials. Consequently, it is possible to hold both the official and the legal entity liable for the same administrative offense.
In the context of Article 192.1 of the Administrative Offenses Code, if the violation is committed by the director or another authorized person, there is a legal basis for holding the legal entity liable for the offense as well.
To summarize the points mentioned above:
- The legislature considers the administrative liability of legal entities to be closely linked to the offenses committed by their officials.
- The relevant articles of the Administrative Offenses Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan make it possible to hold legal entities liable only as a result of the unlawful actions of their officials.
- This legally justifies the fines imposed on both the official and the legal entity for committing the same administrative offense.
- The liability of legal entities is connected to the liability of the relevant authorized officials who regulate and supervise the activities of their employees.
Our Team
With our professional team, we provide an effective and transparent solution to your legal issues

Farid Khalilzade

Nasiba Taghizade

Nurlan Karimli

Gulnara Aliyeva

Faig Abbasov

Aysha Ahmadli

Miragha Muradov

Jeyhun Asadov

Sama Jafarova
Contact
- Neftchi Qurban St.29, Bayil Plaza 4th floor, AZ1003 Baku, Azerbaijan.
- office@fnk.az
- +99412 310 14 68
- +99477 677 03 00 (01,02,03,04)