ROMANIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Manuela Guia, Otilia Vîlcu, Violeta Geru and Cristina Badea, GNP Guia Naghi & Partners
EUR100,000 in one abuse-of-dominance case). Nat - ural persons may qualify for waivers, reductions or instalment plans in respect of this duty depending on their income, while legal persons may only obtain reductions or instalment plans and never a full exemp - tion and only in limited circumstances such as where the duty would exceed 10% of recent average net income or would significantly affect ongoing opera - tions. Costs are further affected by expert and disclosure- related fees, which can be substantial. Romanian procedural law does not provide for a distinct security-for-costs mechanism comparable to that available in some common law jurisdictions, although a party may be required to advance certain costs, such as expert fees, as a condition of obtaining the evidence it has requested. Romanian civil procedure generally follows a loser- pays principle, under which the unsuccessful party bears the successful party’s reasonably incurred costs, including stamp duty, lawyer fees and expert fees. Courts have discretion to reduce disproportion - ate lawyer fees having regard to the complexity of the case. Appeals are available at two further levels above the Bucharest Tribunal, which sits as the court of first instance for private antitrust claims brought under GEO 170/2020. A first appeal ( apel ) is settled by the Bucharest Court of Appeal, which may review both the factual findings and the legal reasoning of the first- instance judgment, while a further appeal ( recurs ) is settled by the High Court of Cassation and Justice, but is limited to points of law. An appeal on points of law ( recurs ) before the High Court of Cassation and Justice must be based on one of the specific grounds listed in the Civil Procedure Code, such as a wrongful application of the law, a breach of the rules of jurisdiction or a judgment lack - ing adequate legal reasoning, rather than on a fresh 12. Appeals 12.1 Basis of Appeal
assessment of the facts, which remains the exclusive jurisdiction of the first-instance court and the court of appeal.
13. Looking Forward 13.1 Legislative Trends and Other Developments
Looking ahead, we expect increased popularity and awareness of private antitrust litigation, especially in follow-on damages claims. This is reasonable given the Competition Council’s ongoing investigations. According to the Romanian Competition Council activity report published for 2025, 14 new investi - gations were opened into possible competition law infringements and about: • 65% of these concern possible anticompetitive agreements (horizontal or vertical); • 21% concern horizontal agreements specifically; • 29% concern vertical agreements; and • 7% concern abuse of dominant position. The report also notes that 18 investigations were closed in 2025 covering: • horizontal and vertical agreements in medical waste disposal; • a horizontal no-poach agreement in the auto-sec - tor skilled labour market; • horizontal agreements in vehicle maintenance/ repair services; • a vertical agreement in paints and coatings; • abuse of dominance and vertical resale-price-fixing in heated tobacco wholesale; • a vertical agreement in luxury sunglasses; and • horizontal bid-rigging in road works, diving equip - ment supply and forestry services. Furthermore, we reasonably expect private enforce - ment cases to surge in consumer-facing businesses, as Romanian law practitioners are familiarised with consumer protection law and remedies, as well as the digital markets sector and the legislation applicable to the industry.
152 A NTITRUST LI T IGATI O N 2026
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook