The dispute concerns a Georgian emigrant and a €2 million lottery case originating in Italy, followed by complex legal proceedings.
The case in question dates back several years and involves a complex set of circumstances supported by case materials, identified individuals, and legal documentation. The dispute concerns a Georgian emigrant, her account of events, and the subsequent legal proceedings that followed.
The case was brought to attention through the public Facebook page of lawyer Lasha Janibegashvili, who, together with his partners, is involved in its legal representation. More information about the legal background and related cases can be found on the legal platform: https://advocatory.ge/en
Janibegashvili and Tchkonia are lawyers involved in a number of high-profile legal cases.
Their professional activities and previous high-profile litigation have also been covered in international media, including an article in Georgia Today about Lasha Janibegashvili and Mariam Tchkonia.
Following this, contact was made with Lela Chokuri, one of the parties involved, in order to obtain her account of the situation. The dispute relates to lottery winnings obtained in Italy, as reflected in the case materials and described by the legal representatives. The parties involved include Ms. N.G. (initials used for confidentiality), whom the Chokuri family had previously assisted during her time abroad, including financially. It is stated that five lottery tickets were purchased using €50.
The case also includes allegations presented by one side regarding pressure and threats communicated to Lela Chokuri through third parties. What began as a legal process later developed into a prolonged dispute involving financial claims and references to possible involvement of individuals allegedly connected to informal networks.
Interview with Lela Chokuri
The circumstances surrounding the dispute, including the allegations of threats, court proceedings, and the ongoing litigation over lottery winnings, were described by Lela Chokuri in an interview. A medical doctor by profession, she previously worked in the law enforcement system in a medical capacity. Chokuri says she expected that the courts would resolve the dispute in accordance with her position, but that this did not happen.
Background and relationship with Nino Goderdzishvili
Q: Could you briefly describe your background and how you came to meet Nino Goderdzishvili in Italy?
Lela Chokuri: I am a certified doctor in therapy and gynecology with 13 years of experience, including three years as a leading specialist in the medical service at the Main Police Department.
I moved to Italy in 2010 with my family. Since 2012, we have had residency status with the right to work. Over time, we supported Georgian migrants in different ways, including financial and informal assistance.
I met N. G. in southern Italy in 2012 in a Georgian community setting. I assisted her on various occasions, as I did with others from Georgia who were in need.
In 2016, she moved to northern Italy with my financial assistance. She had at times requested support for personal and family needs, including medical treatment for her child.
In 2017, I also relocated to northern Italy. Due to limited living space, I was unable to host her in my apartment. However, from 2019 until approximately June 2022, she lived there.
Lottery ticket and winnings
Q: The case concerns lottery winnings reportedly amounting to €2 million. How do you describe the events?
Lela Chokuri: On August 25, Nino Goderdzishvili brought five €10 lottery tickets, which turned out to be winning tickets. I then went to the bank, where the winnings were confirmed.
Following this, she requested financial assistance for her son’s medical treatment in Germany, which I agreed to provide. There are also messages which, according to my position, reflect the initial understanding between us.
Later, after she returned to Georgia, her position changed and she claimed ownership of the winnings. She also submitted documents to the court, which I believe were not accurate, including a salary certificate and a contract.
We submitted materials from Italy disputing these documents. A complaint was also filed in relation to the case, but, according to my information, no investigative actions have been completed.
Payment structure and banking process
Q: Were the winnings received in cash?
Lela Chokuri: No. The funds were transferred through banking channels. I was informed by the bank that the funds originated from Italy. I was also advised on how to manage the money in accordance with reporting requirements and transfer limits, including purchasing property and documenting transactions.
Allegations of pressure and agreement
Q: You have stated that you signed an agreement under pressure. Can you explain?
Lela Chokuri: At a certain stage, I faced pressure and threats, which I perceived as serious. These circumstances influenced my decision to sign an agreement in order to stabilize the situation and ensure safety and family stability.
Later, this agreement became the basis of ongoing legal proceedings.
Legal proceedings and current status
Q: What is the current status of the case?
Lela Chokuri: The case has proceeded through domestic courts and is currently at the cassation stage. My legal representatives are continuing to challenge the previous court decisions, including the assessment of evidence and procedural issues.
Position of the legal representative
An interview was also conducted with Lela Chokuri’s legal representative, Lasha Janibegashvili.
Procedural and evidentiary issues
Janibegashvili indicates that the case is currently at the cassation stage, adding that the defense team became involved later in the process and is reviewing earlier procedural steps and the assessment of evidence.
He noted that, based on the case materials, the lottery tickets were allegedly purchased and redeemed on the same day, and that the court relied on internal assessment of evidence rather than what he considers a fully substantiated evidentiary analysis.
He also stated that documents submitted by the opposing party regarding employment and income were contested by the defense through materials obtained from Italy.
Jurisdiction and cross-border elements
The legal representative also raised the issue of jurisdiction, stating that the alleged winnings and related financial transactions occurred in Italy, and therefore involve foreign legal and fiscal authorities. He argued that this cross-border element is central to the dispute.
Financial transfers and contractual dispute
According to the defense position, financial transfers were made between the parties over time, and later a contract was signed which is now being challenged. The defense argues that the validity and legal interpretation of this agreement remain disputed.
Investigation and procedural conduct
Janibegashvili also stated that complaints were submitted to investigative authorities regarding alleged falsification of documents and coercion, but that, in his view, the response and investigative actions have been limited.
He further stated that the defense is considering additional legal remedies, including international legal mechanisms, depending on the outcome of domestic proceedings.
Jurisdictional Competence
Legal Opinion of Attorney Lasha Janibegashvili
“We are encountering an unprecedented occurrence within the Georgian justice system. The lottery prize was claimed in Italy, and it is a judicially verified fact that Lela Chokuri remitted €400,000 to the Italian Revenue Agency (Agenzia delle Entrate). These facts are substantiated by court-validated evidence.
Nevertheless, any deliberation regarding the validity of the winnings clearly exceeds the jurisdictional boundaries of Georgia.. Since the events transpired in Italy and the primary evidence is located there, the matter falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Italian legal and fiscal authorities.
To draw a parallel: if one were to win a lottery in Argentina, Brazil, or the United States, it would be legally untenable for Georgian common courts to dismiss the fact of the win based on ‘subjective conviction’ and reassign the property to a third party. Such an action would constitute a total and unlawful deprivation of property.
Additional legal analysis and background materials about the case are available on the: legal platform advocatory.ge
Sponsored content
