ITM inspections can lead to significant operational pressure: fines, mandatory measures and follow-up controls. This service is for employers, managers and individuals who received an ITM contravention report (proces-verbal) related to undeclared work, working-time rules or occupational safety and health (SSM) and need a structured challenge in court, grounded in the documents and the actual timeline.
Note: The information is general and does not replace legal advice. Facts, documents and timeline matter.
When you may need this
- You received an ITM contravention report for alleged undeclared work (work without a written contract or incorrect reporting).
- The report concerns working time, overtime, rest periods, records or time sheets.
- ITM found issues in SSM documentation (risk assessment, training, instructions, PPE records) and applied sanctions.
- You believe the inspector relied on incomplete statements or misunderstood the factual situation on site.
- The report includes measures and deadlines that are hard to meet without clarifying what the law actually requires.
- You need to challenge identification errors (company details, workplace, dates, employee data) that affect the case.
- There is a follow-up inspection risk and you need a consistent narrative supported by records.
- You want to understand the effect of filing a court complaint and what evidence is realistic.
What we do, step by step
- Deadline check: confirm the service date of the ITM report and compute the filing window.
- File review: analyse the report, annexes, statements and the exact legal provisions invoked.
- Compliance reconstruction: map working time records, employment documents and SSM documentation to the inspection date.
- Defects mapping: check mandatory elements, competence, factual description and proof references.
- Evidence plan: identify what documents and witnesses can support the factual rebuttal in court.
- Draft and file the contraventional complaint with exhibits and structured legal reasoning.
- Representation: manage hearings, evidence requests and procedural steps until the final decision.
Documents / information useful for a first review
| Document | Why it matters | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| ITM contravention report (proces-verbal) + annexes | Defines allegations, legal basis and sanctions/measures | Bring the full set (annex lists, photos, witness statements) |
| Proof of communication/service (postal notice, email, registry number) | Used to calculate the challenge deadline | Keep envelopes and delivery confirmations |
| Employment documents (contracts, addenda, payroll, REVISAL exports where relevant) | Core for undeclared work allegations and employment status | Organise per worker and per relevant period |
| Working time records (timesheets, access logs, shift schedules) | Supports compliance with working-time, rest and overtime rules | Preserve original logs and audit trails |
| SSM documentation (risk assessment, training records, instructions, PPE records) | Key for SSM-related allegations and preventive measures | Match documents to workplace and activity |
| Internal policies and correspondence related to the inspection | Shows what was requested, answered and how the inspection unfolded | Include emails, registry entries, minutes of hearings |
Risks and common mistakes
- Missing the court deadline because the report’s service date is not tracked carefully.
- Trying to “fix” documents retroactively instead of documenting the situation as it existed at the inspection date.
- Providing inconsistent explanations between managers, HR and employees, creating avoidable contradictions.
- Focusing only on penalties while ignoring the proof logic and the inspector’s factual narrative.
- Not preserving raw records (access logs, timekeeping exports) and relying on summaries.
- Using generic templates that do not match the company’s actual workflow and workplace specifics.
- Ignoring follow-up measures deadlines without a clear compliance plan.
FAQ
What is the usual deadline to challenge an ITM contravention report?
Under the general contraventional framework, the court complaint is typically filed within 15 days from the date the report is served. The safe approach is to confirm the exact service date and check whether a special rule applies for the specific sanctioning act mentioned in your report.
Can ITM rely only on statements taken during the inspection?
Statements can matter, but documentary evidence is often decisive (contracts, payroll, time records, SSM documents). A practical defence is to match each allegation to concrete records and to clarify the context of any statements.
If the issue is working time, what evidence is most relevant?
Timekeeping records, shift schedules, access logs and any internal approval workflows for overtime can be relevant. The key is consistency across sources and a clear timeline tied to the inspection date.
Do SSM documentation problems automatically mean a fine?
Not necessarily. The legal assessment depends on the specific obligation invoked, the actual workplace conditions and what documents existed at the relevant time. A review focuses on whether the inspector’s legal framing and proof match the facts.
Does filing the court complaint suspend enforcement?
In the general framework, filing the contraventional complaint suspends enforcement. In practice, measures with compliance deadlines can still require an operational response, so it helps to plan both litigation and compliance steps together.
Contact
Related internal links
Administrative Law & Urban Planning (services)
Legal fees (hourly / fixed / hybrid)
Law Office Services (all practice areas)
Sources
- OG no. 2/2001 on the general contraventional framework (Portal Legislativ)
- Law no. 108/1999 on the Labour Inspection (Inspecția Muncii) (Portal Legislativ)
- Labour Code (Law no. 53/2003) (Portal Legislativ)
- Law no. 319/2006 on occupational safety and health (SSM) (Portal Legislativ)
- Council Directive 89/391/EEC (framework directive on OSH) (EUR-Lex)
- Inspecția Muncii information page on undeclared work (inspectiamuncii.ro)