ROMANIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Carina Vermeșan and Vincențiu Constantin, Andronic and Partners
6.3 Timing of Applications for Interim Relief Applications for interim relief in Romania can be made before or during the main proceedings, whenever urgency requires the preservation of rights, assets or evidence pending a final decision. However, provi- sional measures that may be granted before the main action is filed are subject to a time limit and automati- cally lapse if the applicant does not initiate proceed- ings within that period. 6.4 Security for Costs Security operates as a key balancing mechanism in Romanian interim relief. In the case of conservatory attachment, judicial sequestration and IP provisional measures, the court may require security and in cer- tain situations it is mandatory. The order granting attachment sets the amount of security and the payment deadline and failure to com- ply within that time results in the measure being lifted by operation of law. 6.5 Interim Injunctions Interim injunctions may be granted where the appli- cant demonstrates a prima facie right and the meas- ure is temporary in nature, meaning it does not pro- duce effects that cannot be reversed. 6.6 Summary Judgment Romanian law does not provide for summary judg- ment; courts generally decide cases through full pro- ceedings, although simplified procedures exist for straightforward claims. 7. Mass Claims and Class Actions 7.1 Procedural Mechanisms Under Romanian law, there is no general mechanism for class actions. Collective actions are limited to spe- cific frameworks, including: • consumer protection cases; • discrimination and human rights cases; • competition damage claims for breaches of Roma- nian competition law; • fraudulent acts committed by a debtor to the detri- ment of creditors in insolvency; and
• the protection of employees’ rights under employ- ment law. 7.2 Standing Requirements National provisions do not recognise general stand- ing rules for class actions; general procedural require- ments apply (eg, common cause, possible representa- tion and a valid mandate). However, in specific areas, the law recognises standing for certain entities: • in consumer protection, only qualified entities may bring representative claims; • in human rights matters, NGOs may act on behalf of groups to protect fundamental rights; • in competition law, consumer or professional asso- ciations may act on behalf of members; • in insolvency, certain creditors or bodies have standing; and • in employment law, trade unions may bring claims on behalf of their members based on a mandate. 7.3 Relief In both collective and individual damage claims, Romanian civil law applies the principle of full com- pensation without distinction. 7.4 Class Actions, Mass Claims and Arbitration Class actions are not commonly brought in arbitra- tion in Romania, as there is no general class action mechanism. 7.5 Trends Class actions are not widely used in Romania, as no general class-action framework exists. In terms of trends, collective action is increasingly common in areas such as insolvency and human rights, particularly when NGOs act on behalf of groups. In consumer protection, although a formal mechanism for representative actions was introduced in 2023, its practical use is still developing. Overall, Romanian practice favours representative actions based on mandates rather than true class actions.
470 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook