Customs Seizures of Counterfeit Goods in Romania: Guide for Foreign Rights Holders

• Border-measure requests with Romanian customs – how to apply for intervention and what information customs need.
• Procedure after seizure and deadlines – what happens once suspicious goods are detained and the key time limits to react.
• Court actions and destruction of goods – when court proceedings are necessary and how to obtain final destruction and damages.

The legal framework is primarily set by Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 on customs enforcement of intellectual property rights and by Romanian Law No 344/2005 on certain measures for ensuring enforcement of intellectual property rights in customs clearance operations. These instruments apply to a broad range of IP rights and can be used by foreign rights holders whose marks, designs or other rights are protected in Romania, either as national rights or EU-wide rights.

Border-Measure Requests with Romanian Customs.

EU framework: Regulation (EU) No 608/2013

Customs enforcement of IP rights across the EU is harmonised by Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights. The Regulation, in force since 1 January 2014, lays down common rules on how customs authorities may suspend release or detain goods suspected of infringing IP rights when they are under customs supervision.

In essence, the Regulation:

• defines which IP rights are covered (trade marks, designs, copyright and related rights, patents, geographical indications and others recognised in EU or national law);
• creates a standardised Application for Action (AFA) that rights holders must lodge in order for customs to act proactively on their behalf;
• sets procedures for detention, notification of the rights holder and the declarant/holder of the goods, and simplified destruction;
• provides special rules for small consignments and perishable goods;
• clarifies the division of costs and the liability of customs authorities.

The European Commission’s official summary on customs enforcement of intellectual property rights emphasises that an AFA is generally compulsory: without it, customs can only act ex officio under very limited conditions and for short periods. The system is designed to encourage rights holders to engage with customs proactively and to provide the operational intelligence needed for effective risk analysis and targeting.

Romanian implementation: Law No 344/2005

In Romania, Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 is complemented by Law No 344/2005 on certain measures for ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights in customs clearance operations. The law assigns responsibilities to the Romanian customs authority, sets out procedures at national level and introduces administrative sanctions in specific situations.

According to the text of Law No 344/2005 and summaries in international IP law databases, the law:

• designates the national customs authority as competent to handle AFAs and subsequent seizure procedures;
• regulates the suspension of customs clearance and detention of suspected goods;
• establishes information duties towards rights holders, declarants and goods holders;
• provides deadlines corresponding to those in Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 (10 working days, extendable, or three working days for perishables);
• introduces fines for rights holders who fail to notify customs when their rights cease to be protected in Romania within a specified period.

In practice, Romanian customs authorities apply a “mixed” EU–national system: EU rules prevail where they are detailed, while Law No 344/2005 fills in national procedural aspects, including communication and cooperation with other enforcement bodies.

Types of IP rights that can be protected at the Romanian border

The EU customs enforcement regime covers a wide spectrum of intellectual property rights. In the Romanian context, an AFA can target, among others:

• Trade marks – Romanian national trade marks and EU trade marks (EUTMs);
• Designs – Romanian designs and registered Community designs;
• Copyright and related rights – for example copyright-protected artwork, logos, packaging, software and other creative elements;
• Patents and utility models – especially for technical products with a high risk of counterfeiting (spare parts, machinery, tools);
• Geographical indications and protected designations of origin;
• Other rights specifically recognised in EU or Romanian law.

Although customs measures are most frequently used for trade marks – given the massive volumes of counterfeit branded apparel, footwear, cigarettes and consumer goods – rights holders relying on designs, copyright or patents can also benefit from border enforcement. For example, owners of registered designs for fashion items or packaging can ask Romanian customs to detain products copying those designs, and copyright owners can target counterfeit DVDs, pirated books or other carriers.

Filing an Application for Action (AFA) for Romania

To allow Romanian customs to act, foreign rights holders generally need to file an AFA through the EUIPO IP Enforcement Portal (IPEP). The portal acts as a single interface linking rights holders and their representatives with customs and police authorities across the EU.

Through IPEP, rights holders can:

• register their company and specify a network of internal and external contacts;
• upload details of their IP rights (trade marks, designs, copyright, patents) and attach certificates or register extracts;
• create and submit AFAs that designate one or more Member States, including Romania, and indicate whether the AFA is national or EU-wide;
• make available product sheets showing genuine goods and known counterfeits (photos, security features, typical packaging, barcodes, serial numbers);
• update information on authorised manufacturers, licensees and distributors, as well as on suspected infringers and risky routes.

Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 explicitly foresees the use of electronic systems for AFAs, and Commission guidance confirms that all Member States have implemented such systems. For Romania, IPEP is the primary channel, although national interfaces may technically exist. In any event, IPEP ensures that Romanian customs officers have instant access to up-to-date rights and product information in their day-to-day risk analysis work.

Minimum content of an AFA

The standard AFA form – and its electronic equivalent in IPEP – requires rights holders to provide, at least:

• identification details of the rights holder and, if applicable, the authorised representative (including telephone and e-mail for urgent contact);
• a list of IP rights to be enforced at the border (registration numbers for trade marks, designs, patents; references for copyright where relevant);
• a clear description of genuine goods, including photos, technical specifications, labels, standard packaging, security seals and anti-counterfeiting features;
• information on typical infringements and known counterfeits, with side-by-side images, differences in packaging, common misspellings, etc.;
• details on the legitimate supply chain: authorised manufacturers, logistics partners, licensees and distributors, typical routes and customs procedures;
• known or suspected high-risk routes, countries of origin and transit, and any enforcement history related to specific traders;
• the rights holder’s choices concerning simplified destruction and procedures for small consignments.

EU and national guidance emphasises that the more operational and concrete the information, the more effective customs intervention will be. Customs officers may only have a few minutes to decide whether to target a shipment, so practical tools – high-quality photos, clear checklists of red flags, and responsive contact persons – can make the difference.

Ex officio action by Romanian customs

Law No 344/2005 also allows Romanian customs to intervene ex officio in certain circumstances. If no AFA is yet in place, or while an application is being assessed, customs may suspend clearance or detain goods for a short period when they have reasonable grounds to suspect an IP infringement.

In such cases:

• customs notify the suspected rights holder, if identifiable, and the declarant or holder of the goods;
• they grant a short period, usually up to three working days, during which the rights holder may confirm the infringement and submit an AFA;
• if no AFA is submitted within the deadline and no other legal ground for detention exists, the goods may be released.

This mechanism allows proactive intervention even when rights holders have not yet put a formal border-enforcement strategy in place. However, ex officio action is time-sensitive and rights holders must be prepared to react quickly, often through a local representative, to convert provisional detention into a full seizure under Regulation (EU) No 608/2013.

Procedure after Seizure and Deadlines.

What happens when customs detain suspicious goods

Once Romanian customs identify goods suspected of infringing IP rights – whether based on an AFA or ex officio – they may suspend release or detain the goods while they are under customs supervision. The core procedural steps are broadly similar to those in other EU countries:

1. Detection – Through document checks, physical inspections or risk analysis, customs officers detect goods that raise IP suspicions (for example, brand-name products with unusual routing, low declared values or poor-quality packaging).
2. Suspension of release or detention – Customs suspend the release of goods for free circulation or detain them in a warehouse under customs control, and draw up an internal report.
3. Notification of the rights holder and the declarant/holder – Customs send formal notifications to the rights holder indicated in the AFA (or suspected rights holder ex officio) and to the declarant or holder of the goods, providing basic information about the consignment.
4. Provision of samples or photographs – Where necessary to assess infringement, customs may provide samples, high-resolution photographs or detailed descriptions to the rights holder or their representative.
5. Start of deadlines – From the date of notification, strict deadlines begin to run for the rights holder to confirm whether the goods are counterfeit and to choose between simplified destruction and court proceedings.

Under Law No 344/2005, rights holders may also request certain information about the goods and those involved in the shipment, such as the names and addresses of the consignee and consignor, and the origin and provenance of the goods. This information is crucial for mapping distribution networks and for planning follow-up enforcement.

Key deadlines: 10 working days (plus possible extension)

The EU and Romanian rules impose tight deadlines to avoid undue delays and costs while ensuring effective enforcement:

• 10 working days – As a general rule, the rights holder has 10 working days from the date of notification to confirm in writing that the detained goods infringe an IP right and to request their destruction, or to demonstrate that court proceedings on the merits have been initiated.
• Extension – This 10-day period may be extended by an additional 10 working days upon a justified request by the rights holder, provided national law allows it. Law No 344/2005 expressly foresees such an extension in Romania.
• Perishable goods – For perishable goods, a shorter period of three working days applies to avoid deterioration and excessive storage costs. Rights holders must be particularly vigilant when customs notify seizures involving foodstuffs or other perishable items.

If the rights holder fails to respond within the applicable time limit, Romanian customs will typically release the goods, unless other legislation (such as product safety or criminal provisions) justifies further detention. It is therefore vital to have clear internal procedures and a designated team or local counsel ready to handle customs notifications promptly.

Simplified procedure for destruction

Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 encourages the use of a simplified procedure for destruction as the default solution in many cases, to avoid costly and lengthy court actions when there is no genuine dispute about the counterfeit nature of the goods.

Under this procedure:

• the rights holder confirms in writing, within the deadline, that the goods are counterfeit or otherwise infringe their IP rights and requests their destruction;
• customs seek the consent of the declarant or holder of the goods; if they explicitly agree or do not object within the set period, consent is deemed given;
• the goods are then destroyed under customs supervision, usually at the expense of the declarant/holder (although in practice rights holders sometimes advance or share costs to expedite the process);
• the case is closed without the need for a court decision on the merits, without prejudice to the rights holder’s ability to sue later for damages if they wish.

In practice, Romanian customs and rights holders make extensive use of simplified destruction, especially for low-value or fast-moving consumer goods where litigation would be disproportionate. This approach also reduces storage costs for customs and frees up warehouse space.

Small consignments and e-commerce

The growth of e-commerce and individual online purchases has led to a surge in small postal and courier consignments containing counterfeit goods. Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 therefore contains special provisions for such consignments, allowing Member States to implement streamlined procedures where the rights holder has opted in through their AFA.

For small consignments addressed to consumers in Romania, this means that customs may be able to destroy infringing items without having to consult the rights holder in every single case, provided the necessary conditions are met and the rights holder has agreed to the special procedure. This can be particularly valuable for brands targeted by thousands of individual counterfeit shipments that would otherwise be impossible to manage one by one.

Access to information and confidentiality

Law No 344/2005 gives rights holders access, upon written request, to information about the consignment and the parties involved, including:

• the name and address of the consignee;
• the origin and provenance of the detained goods;
• certain customs declarations and transport documentation, within legal limits.

However, this information must be used strictly for the purpose of enforcing the relevant IP rights under Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 and the national law. Rights holders are expected to respect data protection and confidentiality rules; misuse of the information (for example, for marketing or unrelated commercial purposes) could expose them to liability.

Storage, destruction logistics and costs

In real-world Romanian practice, there can be a considerable time lag between confirmation of infringement and the physical destruction of goods, especially when large volumes are involved. Constraints include limited warehouse capacity, the need to group similar consignments for efficient destruction, and administrative steps for contracting destruction services.

Key practical points for foreign rights holders include:

• Storage costs – As a rule, these are chargeable to the declarant or holder of the goods, but rights holders may be asked to advance or guarantee certain costs if this accelerates the process.
• Destruction methods – Methods vary depending on the nature of the goods (incineration for cigarettes and certain consumer goods, shredding for textiles, dismantling for electronics, etc.) but must ensure that the goods cannot re-enter commerce.
• Time frames – While some consignments may be destroyed within months, others can take longer; rights holders should maintain regular communication with customs and service providers to monitor progress.

A realistic budget and timeline for customs enforcement in Romania should account not only for legal fees but also for these logistical aspects, especially in sectors where counterfeit goods are bulky or require specialised disposal (for example, chemicals or pharmaceuticals).

Court Actions and Destruction of Goods.

When are court proceedings needed?

Customs procedures and simplified destruction work smoothly when there is no dispute about whether the goods are counterfeit and all parties implicitly or explicitly cooperate. Court proceedings become necessary where:

• the declarant or holder of the goods objects to simplified destruction or denies infringement;
• there is a serious underlying dispute about the validity of the IP right (for example a trade mark under cancellation proceedings);
• the rights holder seeks additional remedies, in particular damages, publication of the judgment, or broader injunctions.

In such situations, Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 and Law No 344/2005 require the rights holder to initiate court proceedings on the merits before the competent Romanian courts within the relevant deadlines (typically within the same 10-working-day period, subject to possible extension). Failing this, customs may have to release the goods, unless other grounds for retention apply (for example criminal proceedings initiated by the authorities).

Types of actions and competent courts

The type of action will depend on the right invoked and the evidence available, but common patterns include:

• Trade mark infringement actions – based on Romanian trade mark law or the EU Trade Mark Regulation, seeking a declaration of infringement, prohibition of future imports and orders for destruction.
• Design or copyright infringement actions – where the goods reproduce protected designs or copyright-protected elements (graphics, packaging, artwork).
• Patent infringement actions – particularly in sectors where technical counterfeit goods pose safety risks, such as automotive parts or tools.

Romanian civil procedure rules allocate IP disputes to specific courts depending on value, nature of the right and procedural posture. In many cases, actions will be brought before specialised sections of the Bucharest courts or other regional courts with experience in intellectual property matters. Foreign rights holders typically act through Romanian lawyers with expertise in IP litigation and customs enforcement.

Interim measures and preservation of evidence

In addition to the main action on the merits, rights holders can request interim measures and evidence preservation to safeguard their position. Inspired by Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, Romanian courts may order, in appropriate cases:

• preliminary injunctions preventing release of the goods and prohibiting further imports or sales;
• seizure or detailed description of suspected goods, documents and materials;
• freezing of assets, bank accounts or other guarantees to secure future damages claims.

Because the goods are already under customs control, many of these measures focus on preventing their release and securing information about the networks behind the shipment. Quick coordination between customs, rights holders and courts is key, especially when large consignments are at stake.

Final destruction orders

Whether following simplified procedures or court proceedings, the ultimate goal of customs enforcement is typically definitive removal of counterfeit goods from the market. Courts can order, in their final judgments, that infringing goods be destroyed at the expense of the infringer, or, in strictly limited situations, that their infringing characteristics be removed so they can be used in another way that does not harm the rights holder.

In Romania, as in the rest of the EU, destruction is the prevailing option for most counterfeit goods, particularly consumer products bearing unauthorised trade marks. From a brand-protection perspective, destruction minimises the risk of diversion back into illicit channels and sends a strong deterrent message to counterfeiters and intermediaries.

Damages and cost recovery

Beyond destruction, rights holders may seek monetary relief. EU law, in particular Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, requires that damages be sufficient to compensate for prejudice and to be dissuasive.

Under the Romanian implementation of these rules, courts will consider:

• actual losses, including lost sales and price erosion;
• unjust enrichment of the infringer, such as profits made from selling counterfeits;
• moral prejudice, where applicable, including harm to reputation and brand image;
• reasonable legal and investigation costs incurred by the rights holder.

In some cases, courts may award a lump-sum amount based, for example, on hypothetical royalties that would have been due had the infringer sought a licence. However, solid evidence on volumes, margins and market impact remains essential for meaningful compensation, especially in cross-border cases where the counterfeit network may extend beyond Romania.

Criminal enforcement and confiscation

In serious or large-scale cases, customs seizures can trigger criminal proceedings. Romanian criminal law includes offences related to trade mark and other IP infringements, as well as smuggling and tax evasion where counterfeit goods are involved. Border police, customs, prosecutors and specialised police units may cooperate in such investigations.

In criminal cases, courts can impose penalties on the offenders and order confiscation of goods and proceeds. Studies on confiscation under Romanian law highlight that authorities may seize not only the counterfeit goods themselves, but also assets derived from the criminal activity, under rules on special and extended confiscation. For foreign rights holders, active participation as injured parties in criminal proceedings can complement civil actions, particularly when dealing with organised counterfeit networks.

Practical roadmap for foreign rights holders

Putting all of the above together, a pragmatic strategy for foreign rights holders focusing on Romanian customs enforcement might look like this:

1. Audit and prioritise IP rights that are particularly exposed to counterfeit trade in or through Romania (trade marks, designs, copyright, patents).
2. Register in IPEP and create detailed product and enforcement profiles, including high-quality images and security-feature descriptions.
3. File an AFA covering Romania (national or EU-wide), clearly designating local representatives with authority to respond quickly to customs notifications.
4. Set up an internal response protocol specifying who reviews customs e-mails, who assesses product images, and who authorises confirmations of infringement and destruction requests.
5. Use simplified destruction as the default in straightforward cases, to reduce costs and avoid unnecessary litigation.
6. Escalate to court actions when the importer contests infringement or when significant quantities and damages are involved, seeking both destruction and financial compensation.
7. Coordinate with criminal authorities in cases of organised or large-scale counterfeiting, considering participation in criminal proceedings as an injured party.
8. Monitor results and adjust strategy yearly, based on quantities seized, routes disrupted and litigation outcomes, to ensure that enforcement resources are focused where they bring the greatest brand-protection impact.

With a well-structured border-enforcement programme anchored in Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 and Romanian Law No 344/2005, foreign rights holders can turn Romania’s strategic position at the EU’s external border from a risk factor into a powerful enforcement opportunity.

Sources

• Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 concerning customs enforcement of intellectual property rights
• European Commission – Intellectual property rights: customs enforcement (summary)
• Romania – Law No 344/2005 on certain measures for ensuring the enforcement of intellectual property rights in customs clearance operations
• WIPO Lex – Law No. 344/2005 (Romania) – English summary
• EUIPO – IP Enforcement Portal (IPEP)
• European Commission – Manual on Customs Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights
• World Trademark Review – Romania: customs doubles down on flow of counterfeits across non-EU borders
• Buzescu & Gavra – New Customs Proceedings in Romania Regarding the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
• Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights – EU summary
• Eurojust – Intellectual property criminal enforcement system: Romania