Romania: Procedural Reforms: Plus Ça Change, Plus C’est La Meme Chose

  • Serban S. VacareluEmail author
  • Adela O. Ognean
Part of the Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice book series (IUSGENT, volume 31)


The chapter provides a critical analysis of civil litigation in Romania with a perspective on the recent procedural reforms. An essential characteristic of the modern Romanian Civil Procedure, discussed in this chapter, is the active role of the judge, a principle that has enjoyed a great deal of recognition in doctrine and has been deeply entrenched in the judicial culture and practice. The Romanian New Code of Civil Procedure provides an express legislative recognition of fundamental principles of procedure that have been developed by doctrine and sanctioned to a large extent by jurisprudence. Despite the comprehensive proclamation of these principles, the New Code of Civil Procedure departs from the application of the stated principles by way of its concrete provisions. A recurring theme behind the legislative reform of Romanian civil procedure is the need for greater efficiency and avoiding undue delays. Significant changes introduced in the fields of mediation and the administration of evidence by attorneys have had a limited impact on the overall system of civil litigation.


Case File Civil Procedure Civil Litigation Specialise Court Closing Order 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alexe CE (2008) Judecătorul în procesul civil, între rol activ şi arbitrar, vol 2. C.H. Beck, BucureştiGoogle Scholar
  2. CEPEJ (2009) National report for Romania. Available at:
  3. Ciobanu VM (1997) Tratat Teoretic şi Practic de Procedură Civilă, vol 2. Naţional, BucureştiGoogle Scholar
  4. Ciobanu VM (2012) Ȋnalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie ȋntre aniversarea a 150 de ani de la ȋnfiinţare şi lupta sa cu Noul Cod de procedură civilă. Revista română de drept privat No. 1/2012, pp 63–75Google Scholar
  5. Deleanu I (2006) Instituţii şi proceduri constituţionale în dreptul român şi dreptul comparat. C.H. Beck, BucureştiGoogle Scholar
  6. Deleanu I (2007) Tratat de Procedură Civilă, vol 2. C.H. Beck, BucureştiGoogle Scholar
  7. Exposé des Motifs (2009) Expunere de Motive Proiect Lege privind Codul de Procedură Civilă. Available at:
  8. Leş I (2010) Tratat de drept procesual civil, 5th edn. C.H. Beck, BucureştiGoogle Scholar
  9. Mironescu GG (1901) Revizuirea Codului de Procedură Civilă. Tipografia Gutemberg, BucureştiGoogle Scholar
  10. Porumb G (1960) Codul de Procedură civilă comentat şi adnotat. Editura ştiinţifică, BucureştiGoogle Scholar
  11. Report (2011) Consiliul Superior al Magistraturii, Raport privind Starea Justiţiei 2011. Retrieved from:
  12. Spinei S (2011) The Romanian legal profession. In: Uzelac A, Van Rhee CH (eds) The landscape of the legal professions in Europe and the USA: continuity and change. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 41–54Google Scholar
  13. Văcărelu S (2012) Legal culture and civil procedure. Romania’s place among civil procedural systems (Romanian national report). In: Maleshin D (ed) Civil procedure in cross-cultural dialogue: Eurasia context: IAPL world conference on civil procedure. Statut Publishing House, Moscow, pp 290–310Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Maastricht UniversityMaastrichtNetherlands

Personalised recommendations