The search tool below will help you to identify court(s)/authority(ies) competent for a specific European legal instrument. Please note that although every effort has been made to ascertain the accuracy of the results, there may be some exceptional cases concerning the determination of competence that are not necessarily covered.
If the Enforcement Order is a court judgment, which includes court settlements or other legal agreements between parties, competence for certification lies with a court of first instance (Article 2 (1) of Emergency Government Order No 119/2006 on measures necessary to implement certain Community Regulations from the date of Romania’s accession to the EU, approved with amendments by Law No 191/2007, as amended).
An application to rectify a certificate is the competence of the court that issued the certificate. The court rules on applications to issue certificates by deciding without summoning the parties. A decision admitting an application may not be appealed. The certificate is issued to the creditor and a copy is sent to the debtor. An appeal may be brought against a decision rejecting an application within 15 days of the decision being issued if the creditor was present, and within 15 days of the decision being served if the creditor was not present. The same provisions apply accordingly in the case of a review on a point of law (recurs). (Articles 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Article I1 of Emergency Government Order No 119/2006 on measures necessary to implement certain Community Regulations from the date of Romania’s accession to the EU, approved with amendments by Law No 191/2007, as amended).
An application to withdraw a certificate must be submitted to the court that issued it within one month of the certificate being served. If after summoning the parties, the court finds that the certificate was issued without the conditions provided for in Regulation (EU) No 805/2004 being met, it re-examines the measures taken and withdraws the certificate, in full or in part. An appeal may be brought against the decision within 15 days of it being served. The same provisions apply accordingly in the case of a review on a point of law (recurs). (Article 7 of Article I1 of Emergency Government Order No 119/2006 on measures necessary to implement certain Community Regulations from the date of Romania’s accession to the EU, approved with amendments by Law No 191/2007, as amended).
Procedures for review mentioned in Article 19(1)
The procedures for review under Romanian legislation that are referred to in Article 19(1) comprise forms of ordinary redress: appeal (apel) and extraordinary redress: review on a point of law (recurs), action for annulment (contestație în anulare) and review (revizuire).
Re-examination procedures referred to in Article 19(1)
The procedures for re-examination under Romanian legislation that are referred to in Article 19(1) comprise forms of ordinary redress: appeal (apel); and extraordinary redress: review on a point of law (recurs), action for annulment (contestație în anulare) and review (revizuire).
An appeal is governed by Articles 466-482 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Decisions given at first instance may be appealed. The time limit for submitting an appeal is 30 days from communication of the decision. Enforcement of the first-instance decision is suspended in the course of the appeal. The appeal and the grounds on which it is based are submitted to the court whose decision is being appealed.
Once the time limit for the appeal has expired, the respondent is entitled, under the legal process in which the appeal made by the opposing party is being heard, to formulate an appeal in writing (known as a cross-appeal: apel incident) by means of an application of his or her own aimed at overturning the decision of the court of first instance.
In the event of procedural co-participation, and when third parties have intervened in the first‑instance proceedings, the respondent is entitled, once the period of the appeal has expired, to bring an appeal in writing (known as a provoked appeal: apel provocat) against the other respondent or person who featured in the case heard at first instance and who is not a party to the main appeal, if the latter's involvement is ultimately such as to have consequences for the respondent's legal status in the proceedings.
The cross-appeal and the provoked appeal are lodged by the respondent as soon as the main appeal has been addressed.
The appeal, duly submitted within the required period, gives rise to a fresh assessment of the merits of the case, and the court of appeal issues its ruling both in fact and in law (devolutive effect of the appeal: efectul devolutiv al apelului).
The court of appeal will re-assess the merits of the case within the limits laid down by the appellant and with reference to the solutions dependent on the part of the judgment that has been appealed against. The devolution will apply to the entire case when the appeal is not limited to certain solutions of the operative part of the judgment under appeal, when the judgment is likely to be set aside or when the subject of the dispute is indivisible.
The court of appeal may uphold the judgment appealed, in which case it will reject or rescind the appeal or declare the proceedings to have lapsed. If the appeal is admitted, the court may set aside or modify the judgment appealed.
If it is found that the court of first instance wrongly settled the case without examining its merits or that the case was heard in the absence of parties, who were not legally summoned, the court of appeal will annul the judgment appealed and will assess the merits of the case. The court of appeal will then annul the decision appealed and refer the matter for re-examination to the court of first instance; referral for re-examination may take place just once in the course of the proceedings.
If the court of appeal finds that the court of first instance lacked jurisdiction, it will rescind the ruling appealed against and refer the matter for examination to the competent court or, as appropriate, will reject the application as inadmissible.
If the court of appeal finds that it has jurisdiction at first instance, it will rescind the ruling appealed and examine the merits of the case.
The appellant cannot, as a result of his or her own appeal, be placed in a situation worse than that brought about by the ruling that is being appealed.
A review on a point of law is governed by Articles 483 to 502 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Rulings appealed against, those given without a right of appeal and others in cases expressly provided for are amenable to review on a point of law. Rulings given on certain subjects such as the following are not subject to such review: legal guardianship, family, civil status, buildings administration, evacuation. Easements, changes in boundaries, the marking of boundaries, obligations to carry out or not to carry out actions that cannot be measured in terms of money, judicial declaration of a person's death, judicial partition, civil navigation, labour disputes, social security, expropriation, compensation for damages caused by judicial errors, applications to which a monetary value of up to RON 500 000 can be assigned, and decisions of Boards of Appeal are amenable only to appeal.
The deadline for applying for a review on a point of law is 30 days from the communication of the decision. The review is completed by the court hierarchically superior to that which delivered the decision that is being appealed. At the appellant's request, the court charged with carrying out the review can order the suspension of the decision subject to review.
A cross-review on a point of law and a provoked review on a point of law can be exercised in the cases specified for a cross-appeal and a provoked appeal.
Where a review on a point of law has been declared admissible in principle, the court may, having verified all the grounds put forward and having examined the point of law, admit, reject or rescind it or declare the proceedings to have lapsed. If a review on a point of law is admitted, the decision appealed may be quashed in whole or in part. The quashed decision has no force. The enforcement or insurance proceedings conducted on the basis of such a decision have no force in law. The court will establish this, ex officio, by means of the decision to quash the appeal.
If the appeal is quashed, the decisions of the court of appeal concerning the questions of law that have been resolved are binding on the court that examined the merits of the case. When the decision has been quashed due to infringement of the procedural rules, the process of examination will begin again from the rescinded act. After an appeal has been quashed, the court of first instance will make a fresh assessment of the case within the limits of the quashing and taking account of all the grounds invoked before the court whose decision has been quashed.
When a point of law is being reviewed and when there is a re-hearing after a decision has been quashed by the appeal court, the situation of the party concerned cannot be caused to worsen.
An action for annulment is regulated by Articles 503 to 508 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Final decisions can be appealed by means of an action for annulment where the complainant was not duly summoned and was not present when the case was examined. An action for annulment is submitted to the court whose decision is being contested. It may be submitted within 15 days of the decision's having been communicated and not later than one year from the date of the decision's having become final. The court may suspend carrying out the decision whose annulment is being applied for on condition that a security is lodged. If the ground of objection is well-founded, the court will settle the matter by delivering just one judgment through which it will annul the decision appealed against. A judgment handed down in an action for annulment can be contested in the same way as the decision appealed against.
A review is governed by Articles 509 to 513 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
A review of a decision on the merits of a case or that refers to the merits of a case may be applied for if, for example, the party concerned has, in circumstances beyond his or her control, been prevented from appearing in court and has notified the court of this. The period within which the review is to be carried out is 15 days, counting from the date on which the cause of the party's not being able to appear ceases to apply. The court may suspend carrying out the decision whose review is being applied for on condition that a security is lodged. If the court declares the action for review enforceable, it will, in whole or in part, modify the decision appealed against and, in the event of an adverse final decision, will annul that decision. A judgment handed down in an action for a review is subject to the appeal procedures laid down by law in relation to reviewed decisions.
If the Enforcement Order is an authentic instrument, competence lies with the district court of the district in which the issuer of that act is located (Article 2(2) of Article I1 of Emergency Government Order No 119/2006 on measures necessary for implementing certain Community Regulations from the date of Romania’s accession to the EU, approved with amendments by Law No 191/2007, as amended).
The national language version of this page is maintained by the respective Member State. The translations have been done by the European Commission service. Possible changes introduced in the original by the competent national authority may not be yet reflected in the translations. The European Commission accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever with regard to any information or data contained or referred to in this document. Please refer to the legal notice to see copyright rules for the Member State responsible for this page.