Appealing a Regulator’s Order: How to Challenge an Inspection in Kazakhstan
06.09.2026
The inspection is over, and what it left behind is an order to remedy violations and the threat of a fine. Many Kazakhstan LLPs and individual entrepreneurs know the situation. But an order is not a final verdict: if it was issued in breach of procedure or without a real violation, it can be challenged. Here is how to act, which deadlines to meet and which inspector mistakes help win the dispute.
The 30-second summary
An order issued after an inspection is appealed by a complaint filed through the authority that issued it, to the higher authority, within three months from the day you learned of it (Articles 91–92 of the Administrative Procedural and Process Code, APPC). As a rule, filing a complaint suspends enforcement of the order (Article 96 APPC). The complaint is considered within 20 working days (Article 99 APPC), and if it is rejected, you may file a claim in court within one month (Article 136(6) APPC), where the authority itself has to prove the order is lawful (Article 129 APPC).
This is general information, not legal advice on your specific case. We checked the provisions against the current versions of the APPC and the Entrepreneurial Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, linked at the end of the article. It is best to show your order and inspection report to a lawyer.
Key deadlines:
- at least 10 calendar days — the period for complying with an order, from the day it is served (Article 152(7) of the Entrepreneurial Code);
- 3 months to file a complaint, 6 months if the order does not state how to appeal it (Article 92 APPC);
- 20 working days to consider the complaint, with no extension unless a law provides otherwise (Article 99 APPC);
- 1 month to file a court claim after the complaint decision or after the review period expires (Article 136(6) APPC).
What an order is and why it matters
After an inspection or a preventive control visit, the inspector draws up a report on the results and, if violations are found, an order to remedy the violations; only one order may be issued per report (Article 152(1) and (4) of the Entrepreneurial Code). The order states what has to be fixed and by when. Within that period the company must inform the authority how the violations were remedied (Article 152(13)). If it does not report or does not remedy them, the authority may order an unscheduled inspection to check compliance (Articles 152(14) and 144(5)(2)).
Orders are issued by many control and supervisory bodies: sanitary and epidemiological, environmental, construction control, labour inspection, consumer protection and others. The inspection procedure for them is common — the chapter on state control and supervision of the Entrepreneurial Code, with exceptions for certain areas (Article 129). Tax audits follow the Tax Code; we cover them separately in our article on appealing a tax audit notice.
When an order can be challenged: three main grounds
Breach of inspection procedure. The most common ground. Inspectors must follow the rules of the Entrepreneurial Code: give written notice of a compliance inspection at least 30 calendar days in advance, and of an unscheduled inspection at least one day in advance, except where the law allows no notice (Article 144(3)–(4), (8)–(10)); present the act ordering the inspection with the mark of registration with the legal statistics authority (Article 147(1)); keep within the time limits (Article 148); and draw up the report and the order properly (Article 152). An inspection with a gross breach is invalid, which is grounds to cancel its report and order (Article 156) — more on this below.
No actual violation. The inspector found a violation that does not exist. For example, a document is recorded as not filed, although it was filed and accepted. This can be shown with a receipt slip, an extract from a register or a reply from the agency.
Disproportionate measure. Even if there was a violation, the authority’s requirement may be excessive. The APPC requires an administrative act to be proportionate — suitable, necessary and proportional (Article 10 APPC), and the court must check proportionality (Article 116(2) APPC).
Appeal deadlines at a glance
| Step | Deadline | Provision |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance with the order | At least 10 calendar days from service | Article 152(7) of the Entrepreneurial Code |
| Request to extend the compliance period | No later than 3 working days after the report and order are served; the authority decides within 3 working days | Article 152(7) |
| Application to the higher authority to cancel the order because the inspection was invalid | Considered within 10 working days | Article 156(1) |
| Complaint against the order | 3 months from the day you learned of the order; 6 months if it does not state how to appeal | Article 92 APPC |
| Forwarding the complaint to the higher authority | No later than 3 working days after receipt | Article 91(4) APPC |
| Review of the complaint | 20 working days from registration, with no extension unless a law provides otherwise | Article 99 APPC |
| Administrative claim in court | One month from service of the complaint decision or after the review period expires | Article 136(6) APPC |
| Appeal against a fine | 10 days from service of a copy of the ruling | Article 826-2(2) of the Code of Administrative Offences |
A fine for an administrative offence is not the same as an order. It is appealed under the Code of Administrative Offences: the APPC procedure does not apply to such cases (Article 3(4) APPC).
If the order does not state the higher authority, the deadline and the procedure for appeal, although the APPC requires this (Article 80(5)), the complaint deadline is extended to six months (Article 92(1-1) APPC). A deadline missed for a good reason may be restored by the body considering the complaint (Article 92(2)).
Step-by-step defence plan
- Review the order immediately. Do not wait for the compliance period to run out: check the act ordering the inspection, the inspection deadlines, the details of the report and the order, and whether the appeal options are stated. If compliance on time is objectively impossible, you may ask the authority to extend the period within three working days of service (Article 152(7) of the Entrepreneurial Code).
- Put your objections on record. Comments and objections on the inspection results are made in writing and attached to the report, with a note to that effect (Article 152(9)). A position stated during the inspection later works for you in the complaint and in court.
- Gather evidence. Documents, certificates, register extracts — anything showing there was no violation or that the measure is disproportionate.
- File the complaint. Through the authority that issued the order: it forwards the complaint to the higher authority within three working days (Article 91(4) APPC). The complaint lays the groundwork for your position in court, so it is worth preparing it with a lawyer experienced in disputes with government agencies. If you go to court without a complaint, the court will return the claim as long as the pre-trial procedure can still be used (Article 138(2)(1) APPC). The higher authority may cancel the order, cancel it and adopt a new one, send the case back for a new review or reject the complaint (Article 100 APPC).
- Go to court. If refused — a claim to annul the order within one month (Article 136(6) APPC). The court may annul the order in full or in part (Article 132 APPC). The burden of proving the order is lawful lies with the authority (Article 129(2)(1) APPC). In court, a lawyer can represent you in administrative cases.
How a dispute with a government agency works under the APPC in general is covered in our article “Disputes with Government Agencies in Kazakhstan in 2026“, and all deadlines are collected in our checklist of appeal deadlines.
Common inspector mistakes that help win the dispute
The Entrepreneurial Code lists gross breaches that make an inspection invalid (Article 156(2)). They include:
- no grounds for the inspection or no act ordering it, or it was not presented to the company;
- no notice of the start of the inspection, or the notice deadline was not met;
- the inspection was carried out without registering the act ordering it with the legal statistics authority where registration is mandatory;
- the inspection time limits of Article 148 were breached;
- the inspection was ordered on matters outside the authority’s competence.
An inspection declared invalid is grounds to cancel the report and the order; the higher authority considers such an application within 10 working days, and a missed deadline is resolved in the company’s favour (Article 156(1)). In addition, the company may refuse to admit inspectors, for example if the time limits in the act ordering the inspection exceed those set by law or the inspection was assigned to persons without authority (Article 155(1)(1)).
Other common mistakes to look for:
- no signature of the official on the report or the order — the signature is mandatory (Article 152(2) and (6));
- wrong legal basis — the order refers to a rule that does not apply to the company;
- no information on how to appeal — you then have six months for a complaint (Article 92(1-1) APPC);
- disproportionate measure — a minor violation is treated as a serious one (Article 10 APPC).
From our practice: when the court cancelled a demolition order
One of KORGAN’s cases was a dispute between the owner of non-residential premises and a construction control authority. The entrepreneur received an order to dismantle the metal fence around the plot and demolish structures already built: the inspectors regarded the work as unauthorised construction.
The defence was built along two lines.
First, no violation. One of the reasons for the order was the “absence” of a notification of the start of construction and installation work. However, the notification had been filed and accepted, as confirmed by the receipt slip. The court held that the government body itself, not the entrepreneur, is responsible for keeping data in its electronic database. This violation was removed from the order.
Second, disproportionality. The court found the requirement to dismantle the whole fence disproportionate: the plot contained high-risk facilities — gas pipelines, gas regulating equipment and high-voltage switchboards — and removing the fence would endanger people and infrastructure. The court applied the principle of proportionality and removed this requirement from the order.
Outcome: the order was cancelled in its key part, and the legal representation costs were recovered from the government body. Both arguments worked because they were part of the position from the start, not added at the last moment before trial.
When you need a lawyer
A lawyer is especially important if:
- the compliance period is already running and the company does not know how to defend itself;
- the order requires major costs or threatens a fine;
- there are visible procedural breaches that are hard to prove on your own;
- the higher authority has already refused and only court remains.
How KORGAN protects businesses from unlawful orders
KORGAN law firm has been in business since 2014 and handles disputes between companies and supervisory and other government authorities. What we do:
- check the order and the inspection report for procedural and substantive breaches;
- prepare objections, an application to cancel and the pre-trial complaint;
- gather evidence that there was no violation or that the requirement is disproportionate;
- handle the case in the administrative court.
More on the service page “Disputes with government agencies“. If the dispute concerns a license, see our article on license refusal and revocation.
We checked the provisions against the Administrative Procedural and Process Code, the Entrepreneurial Code and the Code of Administrative Offences of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to comply with the order while appealing it?
As a rule, no: filing a complaint suspends enforcement of an administrative act (Article 96(1) APPC). The exceptions are the need to protect the rights of citizens and legal entities, public or state interests, and other cases set by law; the authority must state such an exception and its justification in the act itself (Article 96(2)).
How long do I have to appeal an inspection order in Kazakhstan?
Three months from the day you learned of the order, or six months if it does not state how to appeal it (Article 92 APPC). After the complaint decision, you have one month to file a court claim (Article 136(6) APPC).
Can I go straight to court without a complaint?
As a general rule, no: you go to court after a pre-trial appeal unless the law provides otherwise (Article 91(5) APPC). The court will return a claim filed without a complaint if the pre-trial procedure can still be used (Article 138(2)(1) APPC).
How does an order differ from a ruling on an administrative offence?
An order requires a violation to be remedied and is appealed under the APPC. A ruling imposes a penalty such as a fine and is appealed under the Code of Administrative Offences within 10 days of service of a copy (Article 826-2(2)).
If the higher authority upheld the order, is there a chance in court?
Yes. The court considers the case itself: in a claim to annul, the authority must prove the order is lawful and may rely only on the reasoning stated in the act (Article 129 APPC), and the court must also check proportionality (Article 116(2) APPC).
How should a company protect itself while the inspection is still under way?
Check the act ordering the inspection and the time limits, and put comments and objections on the results in writing — they will be attached to the inspection report (Article 152(9) of the Entrepreneurial Code). The position taken at the inspection stage often decides the outcome.
Contact KORGAN
We will review your order and inspection report, assess your prospects and prepare a complaint or claim.
The first consultation is free.
Phone and WhatsApp: +7 700 500 05 53
Or message us on WhatsApp. Other contacts are on our contacts page.