Month: May 2025

Selling on Instagram or TikTok? You're already an entrepreneur - even if you don't think so yourself 

Posted on by avocad_bxgv12hf

Social networks have become more than just a place to share photos - they are the new shop window. Increasingly, products are offered on Instagram, TikTok or Facebook, and orders go through messages. Simple, fast and no headache of setting up an e-shop. But there's a "but": if you're selling, it's a business. And there are clear rules for business. What are they? - Egidijus Kieras, attorney at AVOCAD, answers .

Not registered? That doesn't mean you're not an entrepreneur

According to the lawyer, if you offer goods or services on a regular basis, advertise, accept payments and ask your customers for a delivery address, you are a businessman. It doesn't matter whether you are trading as a small partnership, a limited liability company or as a natural person. If you meet the criteria of an entrepreneur, you are also subject to the requirements.

What is a must for every social media marketer?

Whether you find customers through Reels or Story, you need to ensure compliance with the law, for example:

  • Before the product is sold, provide the consumer with information about the product and its price,
  • who you are (name, title, contacts),
  • explain how the consumer can return the goods,
  • exercising the buyer's right to withdraw from the purchase within 14 days (in the case of a non-food item or individual product)
  • have at least a simple privacy policy if you collect any information (e.g. email, address);
  • inform you about the dispute resolution procedure.

Lawyer Egidijus Kieras stresses that even through Instagram posts, it must be clear to the buyer what they are buying, from whom and under what conditions.

Under the EU Consumer Rights Directive and Lithuanian law, e-commerce on social networks is not "special" - it is subject to the same rules as any other e-shop. And if you're still collecting customer names, phone numbers or addresses, welcome to GDPR territory.

"The Data Protection Inspectorate has repeatedly fined small businesses for collecting customer information without any clear policy or consent. And no, 'send us a message' is not a sufficient form of consent or contract," says the lawyer.

What are the real risks?

Sellers often say: "I'm too small to be of interest." But according to Kier, any dissatisfied buyer can complain. This could lead to an inspection by the Consumer Rights Protection Authority, possible fines or even blocking of the account for violations. You may also have to answer personally if you are not a legal entity.

Taxes are another risk. If you haven't registered your business, you could also face the IRS.

"Doing business through social networks is not a 'grey area'. The law has long since caught up with practice. The sooner you realise this, the less likely you are to move from consumer comments to the eyes of the Consumer Protection Authority and the Tax Inspectorate," warns an AVOCAD lawyer.

The question is - what if I just sell clothes on Vinted? Is that also considered a business?

The answer depends on the scope and systematicity. According to Egidijus Kieras, the one-off sale of a second-hand jumper is not really a commercial activity. However, if you sell a lot, on a regular basis and for profit, it can already be considered a business. In this case, there is an obligation to register the activity, to comply with consumer protection and data processing rules, and to declare income.

The Court of Justice of the European Union has clarified that even a natural person can be considered a "seller" if he or she regularly sells goods via an online platform, even if they are second-hand. Therefore, it is not what you sell, but how often and for what purpose.

 

AVOCAD becomes legal partner of Jonava basketball club CBet

Posted on by avocad_bxgv12hf

AVOCAD has become the official legal partner of Jonava basketball club CBet. The aim is to strengthen the legal basis of the club's activities and contribute to the growth of the organisation.

"Basketball in Lithuania is more than a game. It is a social phenomenon with its own economics, international aspects and legal subtleties. As a team of lawyers, we are highly motivated to be a part of this process and to contribute to one of the most growing and dynamic sports organisations in Lithuania," says Egidijus Langys, Managing Partner of the firm.

Vaidas Vaškevičius, President of Jonava Basketball Club, emphasised that modern basketball requires not only a strong sports team, but also a professional backbone structure. "It's not just a sport. It is a huge system, which - from player contracts to sponsorship or international cooperation - needs a clear legal basis. We are delighted that our club will now be represented by an experienced law firm that is close to both the sport and a broad approach to the law," noted the club's President.

He said that the spectrum of legal issues in the activities of basketball clubs is very broad and dynamic. From player contracts, coaches' contracts, licensing, to intellectual property protection, use of trademarks, sponsorship agreements or international transfer rules, every aspect requires precision and professionalism.

"In this sector, legal assistance becomes particularly important when dealing with disputes with players or agents, when participating in FIBA or LKL regulatory processes, or simply when managing a growing organisation. The involvement of lawyers ensures that the club can concentrate on the game and not on the legal rebus," said Langys when signing the cooperation agreement.

Jonava CBet is a consistently growing club. In the 2024-2025 Betsafe-LKL season, the team is demonstrating a stable, ambitious and competitive game - the team is currently among the four strongest teams in the league.

 

Clarification of the Supreme Court of Lithuania on parking in courtyards of apartment buildings: residents can determine the procedure for using a parking lot that does not belong to them 

Posted on by avocad_bxgv12hf

 

Owners of multi-apartment buildings exercising their right of shared ownership and having a legitimate need to use a parking space in the yard, even if it belongs to another owner, can claim the use of the parking space and the compensation to be paid. This was stated by the Supreme Court of Lithuania in a ruling issued on 6 May 2025.

Often, when developers are developing apartment or townhouse projects on their own land, there are cases where the spaces used to serve the main facilities, such as parking lots or access roads, are not allocated proportionally to the residents when the apartments or houses are sold. According to Eimantas Čepas, an attorney at law at AVOCAD, this decision of the Court of Cassation is an important signal for both residents and property developers. "This case becomes a precedent for a clearer definition of the legitimate grounds for the use of infrastructure belonging to another entity, especially when it comes to long-term use and public interest," the lawyer notes.

Who has the right to use the yard?

The circumstances of the case before the Supreme Court revealed that the parking lot adjacent to the apartment building is owned by a private legal entity, UAB, but has been used for many years by the residents of the apartment building, as the detailed planning documents, in implementing the requirement to provide a certain number of parking spaces, envisaged that it would serve the main building, an apartment building. The UAB claimed that the residents had illegally occupied their territory and demanded that they stop using it.

However, the Supreme Court noted that in such situations it is important to assess the reasons for the residents' use of the parking lot, whether it is necessary for the proper operation of the apartment building, and whether there is a legal basis for declaring the parking lot to be an appurtenance of the apartment building.

Proportionality and fairness are key

The Court clarified that the mere fact that a parking lot is not a common facility does not automatically mean that the residents are not entitled to its use.

"The use by residents of a parking lot belonging to another legal person may be justified on the basis of the principles of justice, reasonableness and fairness, where such use is necessary for the functioning of the apartment building and the owner is compensated for the damage," the ruling states on .

The Court stressed that it is necessary to assess all the circumstances - whether the site is actually needed for the residents' needs, whether the residents were willing to agree on the compensation, and whether the compensation is reasonable.

According to lawyer Eimantas Čeps, in situations where the owner of the land or building agrees to the use and the parties agree on reasonable compensation, the use arrangement is considered legal and reasonable.

In his view, this ruling of the Supreme Court of Lithuania may have significant consequences for the residents of cities throughout Lithuania, especially in densely urbanised areas where infrastructure development, ownership and actual use of land or buildings often intersect. Despite the fact that the land or structures serving the main buildings sometimes remain outside the common ownership of the residents after the real estate projects are realised, the actual use or purpose of such land or structures may provide a legal basis for declaring them to be subordinate and for deciding their legal status and fate accordingly.

"The Supreme Court of Lithuania recognises in this decision the legal significance of such a factual practice if it complies with the principles of reasonableness, fairness and proportionality, and promotes constructive solutions between communities and owners of private land or buildings," says the lawyer.

This decision sends a clear message: urban infrastructure and land use must be addressed through dialogue, consensus and fair compensation. Residents, developers and municipalities alike are encouraged to strike a balance between property rights and the public interest, and the Supreme Court's jurisprudence provides a valuable basis for finding lasting solutions in an urbanised environment.

"The principle of justice should not be limited to cadastral maps, but should also reflect the reality of people's lives," notes AVOCAD's lawyer.

Lawyers and algorithms: the Court of Cassation introduces a disclosure obligation for artificial intelligence 

Posted on by avocad_bxgv12hf

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is one of the hottest topics in the world today when it comes to tools that help people perform a wide range of tasks in a variety of careers - including law, where AI is already being used to analyse documents or generate text, but is still buggy and inaccurate enough to work without human supervision.

The Supreme Court of Lithuania (SCL) has recently announced an important innovation: in cassation appeals in criminal cases, it is mandatory to disclose if generative artificial intelligence was used to prepare the document.

The Court's guidelines state that where a cassation appeal or a part of a cassation appeal submitted to the Court of Cassation has been prepared by means of generative artificial intelligence tools, such fact should be disclosed at the beginning or at the end of the document by stating that the cassation appeal or part of a cassation appeal submitted to the Court of Cassation has been prepared by means of generative artificial intelligence and that its content has been carefully checked by the person who prepared or submitted the cassation appeal.

This suggests that lawyers are striving to keep pace with technological progress by recognising the value of IoT for drafting documents, but that the tool has not yet lived up to expectations due to the errors it makes. Lawyers will therefore have to wait for the flawless assistance of the IoT in their work, especially as mistakes in law can be very costly.

Will legal professionals even be needed once the 'infallible' DI is in place?

Here I would like to mention one idea from case law: the modern concept of law is based on a clear distinction between law and a statute or other legal act, recognising law as more fundamental than a statute or other legal act. The mere formal application of the provisions of laws and regulations can lead to a legal decision, which may not always be correct, and therefore it is not just any legality that must be recognised, but only the legality of justice. In a case where it is clear from the facts of the case and from generally accepted principles of law that the solution to a particular social conflict will be formal but unjust, it is necessary to give priority to the general concept of law.

Law and justice is therefore not just a formal process of applying the law, but a pursuit of justice, for which formal and dry legal arguments are not enough if they conflict with a sense of justice.

Dainius Antanaitis, Attorney at Law of the Law Firm AVOCAD