ROMANIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Cosmin Vasile and Violeta Saranciuc, Zamfirescu Racoți Vasile & Partners
Introduction Romania has a long-standing tradition of internation - al arbitration, an arbitration-friendly legal framework, supportive, pro-enforcement courts and a growing community of qualified international arbitration prac - titioners. All this makes the country one of the most reliable arbitration seats and dynamic arbitration mar - kets in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Romania is party to the main international arbitration treaties, including the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbi - tral Awards (New York, 10 June 1958), the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (Geneva, 21 April 1961) and the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (Washington, 18 March 1965). Its main home-based arbitral institution attached to the Romanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry is over 70 years old (established in 1953) and has unin - terruptedly administered international commercial arbitration over that time. The Romanian arbitration market is equally receptive to the services of interna - tional arbitral institutions, the most popular being the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the Vienna International Arbitral Centre (VIAC), the London Court of Arbitration (LCIA) and the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC). Romania is often among the most represented nationalities from Central and Eastern Europe at the ICC. The number of ICC arbitrations with a Romanian connection peaked in 2014–2017, in the context of a legal framework that provided for ICC arbitration as the settlement method for public procurement infrastructure disputes. Even though the legal framework has changed since then and currently refers these disputes to the local arbitral institution, the ICC remains a popular choice, as its most recent statistics for 2024 and 2025 mention Romanian par - ties as the fifth most present from Central and South- Eastern Europe. Also, according to the ICC’s statistics for 2025, Romanian law was the third most commonly used applicable law in ICC arbitration proceedings, and Romania was third by the number of arbitra - tors and first by the number of presiding arbitrators appointed, across the same region. At VIAC, Roma - nia was second after Austria based on the origin of
the parties in 2023 and 2025, and third based on the nationality of the arbitrators in 2023, 2024 and 2025, according to the institution’s statistics. The majority of international arbitrations in Romania arise in the construction and infrastructure and energy sectors. Increasingly, arbitration clauses are used in contracts concluded for renewable energy projects and in the IT sector. High Court’s Binding Ruling Imposing Stricter Rules onLocal Arbitral Institutions Romania applies rigorous standards to its domestic arbitral institutions, reinforcing the reliability of Roma - nian arbitration. On 26 August 2024, the Romanian Court of Cassation and Justice (the “High Court”) published its binding decision of 17 June 2024 on the uniform interpretation and application of Article 616 (1) of the Romanian Code of Civil Procedure regarding institutional arbitration. This decision is the most nota - ble development concerning arbitration in Romania in recent years, limiting the types of domestic entities that can administer arbitration in Romania. The matter was escalated by Romania’s General Pros - ecutor, who referred to the High Court the question of whether associations and foundations established in accordance with domestic law can include in their statutes the purpose of organising institutional arbitra - tion. This referral was prompted by conflicting case law in the context of an increasing number of newly established non-governmental organisations (NGOs) functioning as small arbitral institutions in Romania and consequent legitimacy concerns. In essence, the High Court has established that NGOs of public interest may administer institutional arbitra - tion in Romania only if authorised by law to do so. The decision does not deal with the activity of inter - national or foreign arbitral institutions, and certainly will not apply to established institutions, such as the ICC, VIAC and the SCC, which are popular choices among Romanian arbitration users. In fact, in the rea - soning of the decision, recalling Romania’s long tradi - tion of institutional arbitration, the High Court noted that Romania accepted the jurisdiction of international arbitration courts in commercial matters by ratifying in
779 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook