Court clarifies which email is most important for serving documents

Nowadays, when the majority of procedural documents are sent electronically, the question arises: which email address is considered to be the correct one for service of documents - the one you have indicated in the "Mano VMI" system or the one you have provided to the authority in the particular case? The Supreme Court of Lithuania (SCL) has recently dealt with a case in which this dilemma has become a fundamental issue and has provided an interpretation. According to lawyers, it is important for everyone to know.

"In order for a person to be able to actually exercise his or her rights in administrative proceedings, it is essential that procedural documents - such as a report on an administrative offence - are properly served on him or her," says Domantas Velykis, a lawyer at the law firm AVOCAD . The rights of a person subject to administrative liability are set out in the Code of Administrative Offences. These include the right to have access to the case file, to participate in the proceedings and provide explanations, to submit necessary documents and items in writing or orally, to be assisted by a lawyer, and to appeal against decisions taken.

According to the procedure for service of procedural documents (e.g. summonses), documents may be sent via the National Electronic Mail System, by e-mail, by other electronic means, or by registered mail. Documents may be sent by e-mail when the address is indicated in the 'Population Register' or in other public information systems used for electronic services. If there is no such address, documents may be sent by e-mail only if the person himself or herself declares that he or she wishes to receive the documents in this way.

However, in order to use the electronic services of "Mano VMI" (e.g. to submit documents, purchase or renew business licenses, register as a VAT payer, recover overpayments, etc.), it is necessary to register in this system. The first time you log in, you will need to provide your email address. A confirmation link will be sent to your email address, which must be activated. If the address is not validated, you will not be able to log in to the system.

According to lawyer Domantas Velykis, the e-mail address confirmed in this way is saved in the "Mano VMI" system and used to send notifications and documents. Importantly, such an address also complies with the requirements of the Code of Administrative Offences, i.e. it is considered to be an official address provided in the state information system for receiving electronic services.

Nowadays, many people have several e-mail addresses, so the question arises - which address is considered to be appropriate for the submission of procedural documents in an administrative offence case: the one indicated in the Mano VMI system or the one that the person has indicated to the institution?

Supreme Court of Lithuania: "it is important to assess the actual use of email"

This situation was recently examined by the Supreme Court of Lithuania. The courts of first and appeal instance ruled that the institution had violated the rights of the person because it had not sent the documents to the e-mail address that the person had provided to the institution, but to the address confirmed and used in the "Mano VMI" system.

However, the Court of Cassation has stressed that it is important to assess not only the formal indication of the details, but also the actual use of the email. If a person requests documents to be sent to one address but actually uses another, it is for the institution to determine which address is actually available. In the absence of such a finding, the procedural documents should be sent by other alternative methods provided for in the law, such as registered mail.

Commenting on such case law, Domantas Velykis, lawyer at AVOCAD, summarises that the e-mail address indicated and confirmed in the Mano VMI system may be considered as a proper address for service of procedural documents, even if the person has indicated a different e-mail address to the institution - but only if it is proven that the documents actually reach the person at this address.

He also points out that it is the user's responsibility to ensure that the contact details provided in their account are accurate and up to date. "Therefore, periodically check that the email address provided in this system is correct and actively used to avoid legal misunderstandings and possible negative consequences," the lawyer advises.