ROMANIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Manuela Guia, Otilia Vîlcu, Violeta Geru and Cristina Badea, GNP Guia Naghi & Partners
The principal statutory basis for such claims is GEO 170/2020, which transposes the Damages Directive and applies as lex specialis to the general tort liability rules of the Civil Code. For further details, see 1.1 Current Framework for Private Antitrust Litigation . Prior to the transposition of the Damages Directive, claims for damages were based on the Romanian Competition Law No 21/1996, which provided for the right of natural and legal persons harmed by an anti - trust infringement to bring damages claims within two years following the date on which the Competition Council’s decision became final. Such claims were generally based on Competition Law 21/1996 and general Romanian rules on tort liability. Private enforcement was used in a range of antitrust infringements, ranging from abuse of dominance to cartels or exchange of information. Statutory Basis for Other Private Enforcement Claims Beyond compensatory damages claims, claimants may also seek the annulment of contracts or individ - ual clauses said to implement or reflect an anticom - petitive agreement, relying on the automatic nullity of prohibited agreements under Article 101 (2) TFEU and Article 52 (1) of Competition Law No 21/1996, typically coupled with a restitution claim, as well as claims framed under unfair commercial practices or unfair contract terms legislation. Hybrid Claims In addition to compensatory damages and annulment claims, Romanian claimants may in principle advance so-called hybrid claims, combining a follow-on dam - ages claim covering the period addressed by a final infringement decision with a stand-alone head of claim covering harm allegedly suffered outside that decision’s temporal or material scope, for instance for conduct predating the start of the sanctioned infringe - ment. For example, in an investigation conducted in the maritime sector, the Competition Council found an infringement relating to towage services and, because the relevant market was considered similar to the pilotage services market, a private damages action
has been brought in relation to the pilotage services market, illustrating how a finding in one closely related market can support a claim in an adjacent, unsanc - tioned market. Contractual claims may also be available where the parties have a direct contractual relationship, although Romanian law generally does not allow a claimant to choose freely between contractual and tortious rem - edies where the alleged harm arises from a contract, so that a claimant is usually confined to the private damages framework rather than being able to plead the two bases cumulatively. In addition, objections may be raised against enforcing contractual obliga - tions if antitrust conduct affects them. 2.2 Courts Courts’ Jurisdiction in Private Antitrust Private antitrust damages actions brought under GEO 170/2020 fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Bucharest Tribunal as the first-instance court, regardless of the parties’ domicile or where the harm occurred. A first-instance ruling is subject to appeal before the Bucharest Court of Appeal, which may review both the facts and the law and a further appeal limited to points of law lies to the High Court of Cas - sation and Justice. Claims that fall outside the scope of GEO 170/2020 are not subject to this exclusive jurisdiction and may be brought before any otherwise competent Roma - nian court or a member state court. Examples include claims submitted to the courts before the adoption of GEO 170/2020 or the prior GEO 39/2017, claims brought in the period between the two laws or private enforcement claims for remedies other than damages (ie, annulment claims). The exclusive jurisdiction is similar to that applica - ble in public antitrust enforcement litigation, where actions seeking the annulment of decisions issued by the Romanian Competition Council fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Bucharest Court of Appeal, with appeals heard by the High Court of Cas - sation and Justice.
143 A NTITRUST LI T IGATI O N 2026
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook