Challenging traffic fines in Romania: how to appeal the contravention report and what real chances you have

In contravention matters, the general regime is established by Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 on the legal regime of contraventions, while the specific traffic rules are set out in Government Emergency Ordinance no. 195/2002 on traffic on public roads, supplemented by Government Decision no. 1391/2006 approving the Regulation for the application of GEO 195/2002.

1. Legal framework for traffic contravention fines

Before looking at how a fine can be challenged in practice, it is useful to understand what legal acts apply and how they interact. Traffic contraventions are a special category of contraventions, but they remain subject to the general procedural rules.

The main relevant instruments are:

• Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 on the legal regime of contraventions – sets out the general rules on finding, sanctioning and challenging contraventions (deadline for filing the complaint, contents of the contravention report, nullities, jurisdiction of the court etc.).
• Government Emergency Ordinance no. 195/2002 on traffic on public roads – regulates specific traffic contraventions (speeding, running a red light, not wearing the seatbelt, failing to give way etc.) and lays down the main and secondary sanctions (fine, suspension of the licence, penalty points).
• Government Decision no. 1391/2006 – Regulation for the application of GEO 195/2002 – details the concrete procedure in traffic: how speed measurements are made, the obligations of the traffic police officer, how the contravention report must be completed, traffic rules etc.
• Government Emergency Ordinance no. 80/2013 on judicial stamp duties and Article 36 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 – which together establish that contravention complaints are exempt from judicial stamp duties.
• Law no. 203/2018 on measures to improve the collection of contravention fines – introduced the rule allowing payment of half of the minimum fine within 15 days, which also applies in traffic matters.
• The Code of Civil Procedure – applies subsidiarily to the contravention procedure, including for procedural time limits and general rules of evidence.

In addition, court practice has been harmonised through decisions of the High Court of Cassation and Justice (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție – HCCJ) in appeals in the interest of the law and preliminary rulings, particularly relevant to our topic being:

• HCCJ Decision no. 13/2018 (appeal in the interest of the law) – concerning nullity of the contravention report and the importance of describing the offence.
• HCCJ Decision no. 16/2023 (appeal in the interest of the law) – on the interpretation of Article 31 paragraph (1) of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 (the 15-day time limit for the contravention complaint and the possibility of supplementing or amending it).
• HCCJ Decision no. 10/2013 (appeal in the interest of the law) – on service of the contravention report by posting and the conditions under which this is valid.

2. What is the traffic contravention report and what must it contain

The contravention report (proces-verbal de constatare și sancționare a contravenției) is the key document on which the traffic fine is based. It is usually drawn up by a traffic police officer or another authorised body and contains both a description of the offence and the sanction applied.

The general rules on the contents of the report are laid down in Article 16 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, while in traffic matters they are supplemented by Articles 109 and following of GEO no. 195/2002 and the corresponding provisions of the Regulation.

2.1. Mandatory elements of the report (Article 16 GO no. 2/2001)

Under Article 16 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, the contravention report must contain a series of mandatory elements, including:

• the date and place where the report is drawn up;
• the name, position and institution of the reporting officer;
• the identifying data of the contravening person (name, personal identification number, domicile, registration number of the vehicle etc.);
• a description of the contravention, indicating the precise date, time and place of commission and the relevant circumstances;
• indication of the legal provision breached (article, paragraph, letter);
• indication of the sanction applied (fine, warning, suspension of the licence etc.);
• any secondary measures (confiscation, retention of the licence, immobilisation of the vehicle etc.);
• any objections made by the contravening person;
• the signature of the reporting officer and, in principle, of the contravening person.

The absence or incorrect completion of these elements may, in certain circumstances, lead to the annulment of the report by the court. However, not every formal error is sufficient for annulment, as we will see below.

2.2. Absolute and relative nullities of the contravention report (Article 17 GO no. 2/2001)

Article 17 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 lists the cases of absolute nullity of the contravention report (for example, absence of the name and surname of the contravening person, absence of the description of the offence or of the date of commission, absence of the signature of the reporting officer etc.). These nullities may be raised ex officio by the court.

By contrast, other defects (for example, a very brief but existent description of the offence, certain drafting errors or incomplete indication of the legal provision) may entail only so-called “relative nullities”, which must be raised by the contravening person, and the court checks whether they have actually caused harm to his or her rights or legitimate interests.

In Decision no. 13/2018, the High Court emphasised that the mere lack of a detailed indication of all the circumstances of the offence does not automatically lead to absolute nullity of the contravention report, as long as the contravening person understands what is being imputed and can effectively exercise the right of defence.

2.3. Comments of the contravening person and refusal to sign

From a practical perspective, the moment when the report is drawn up is important because the law allows the contravening person to record objections directly in the report. According to Article 16 paragraph (7) of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, the officer is obliged to record the objections, and refusal to do so may be a serious ground of challenge.

Refusal to sign the report does not affect its validity, but it triggers the obligation of the authority to serve it subsequently by post or posting, in accordance with Article 26 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001. Service is essential for calculating the 15-day time limit for lodging a complaint, and failure to comply with the rules may lead to annulment of the report, as highlighted by HCCJ Decision no. 10/2013 on service by posting.

3. Time limit for challenging the contravention report: 15 days from service

The basic rule on challenging contravention reports is laid down in Article 31 paragraph (1) of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001: “A complaint may be lodged against the contravention report within 15 days of the date of delivery or communication thereof.”

It is essential to understand two aspects: when the 15-day time limit starts to run and what the relationship is between this time limit and the obligation to motivate the complaint.

3.1. When the 15-day time limit starts

In practice, several situations can arise:

• Report delivered on the spot – for example, you are stopped by the traffic police, a report is drawn up and you sign it (or you refuse to sign, but a copy is handed to you). In this case, the 15-day time limit runs from the date indicated in the report as the date of delivery.
• Report served by post – usually in cases where the contravention is detected by technical means (radar, video cameras) and you are not stopped on the spot. The time limit runs from the date on the proof of service (acknowledgement of receipt) or, in its absence, from the date considered by law to be the date of service by posting.
• Report served by posting – a subsidiary procedure, applicable when you are not found at your domicile or refuse to accept the correspondence. In this case, service is valid if the conditions of Article 26 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 are met (report of posting, witnesses etc.), and the time limit runs from the date of posting, as held by the High Court in Decision no. 10/2013.

The 15-day time limit is calculated according to the rules in the Code of Civil Procedure (Article 181 and following): the day on which the time limit starts is not counted, and if the last day is non-working, the deadline is extended to the next working day.

3.2. Must the complaint be fully motivated within 15 days?

For a long time, court practice was inconsistent on whether the contravention complaint had to be not only lodged but also fully motivated in fact within the 15-day time limit. In Decision no. 44/2016 (preliminary ruling), the High Court initially considered that the complaint had to be motivated within this time limit.

Later, however, in Decision no. 16/2023 (appeal in the interest of the law), the High Court clarified that Article 31 paragraph (1) of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 does not exclude the application of Article 204 paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. This means that the complaint can be supplemented or amended (including with new arguments of illegality) up to the first hearing at which the parties are legally summoned.

In practice this means that:

• you must file the complaint within 15 days of the delivery or service of the report;
• you may file additions or clarifications up to the first hearing, to develop your arguments or to invoke new grounds and evidence.

4. Competent court and where to file the contravention complaint

According to Article 32 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, the contravention complaint is filed with the district court (judecătoria) in whose territorial jurisdiction the contravention was committed. This is a special jurisdiction rule and also applies to traffic matters.

4.1. The territorially competent district court

Generally, the report indicates the place where the contravention was committed (locality, road, kilometre, road section) and sometimes the competent court. If the court is not indicated, but you have the locality, you can identify the competent court using the official court portal (portal.just.ro) or the website of the Ministry of Justice.

It is important to file the complaint with that court (at the registry or by post), not with the court at your domicile, to avoid procedural incidents relating to lack of jurisdiction (objections, reallocation, delays).

4.2. Practical ways of filing

The contravention complaint may be filed:

• personally at the court registry – you will receive a case number and a proof of filing;
• by post, with acknowledgement of receipt – the date of posting is relevant for compliance with the 15-day time limit;
• by fax or e-mail, where the courts accept this, subject to submission of the original document later, under the rules of the Code of Civil Procedure;
• in some cases, through electronic court platforms, if the specific court has implemented such tools in practice.

Pursuant to Article 36 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, the contravention complaint is exempt from judicial stamp duties, as are appeals and other incidental claims filed in the same case.

5. Practical steps for challenging a traffic fine

Beyond the statutory provisions, drivers need a clear action plan. Below is a practical step-by-step route from the time you receive the contravention report until the case is decided.

5.1. Carefully analysing the contravention report

The first step is to read the report very carefully. Check the following:

• identifying data – your name, personal identification number, licence plate number, all must be correct;
• date and time of the offence – inconsistencies (for example, an impossible date or a date that does not match reality) may lead to nullity, as shown by court practice in cases concerning erroneous dates, published on legal blogs and specialised sites;
• the exact place of the offence – this should be indicated sufficiently clearly (locality, road, kilometre, direction of travel, possibly a reference to a sign);
• legal classification – the Article in GEO 195/2002 or the Regulation and the applicable sanction (fine and, as the case may be, suspension).

Also check whether the report contains a section with your objections. If you wished to raise objections and the officer refused to record them, this may be used in the complaint as an indication of lack of impartiality or procedural irregularity.

5.2. Gathering evidence

Although the contravention report enjoys a rebuttable presumption of veracity (it proves the factual situation until the contrary is shown), this presumption can be overturned by appropriate evidence. Case-law of the High Court and courts of appeal stresses the need for evidence from both sides, especially where the facts are disputed.

Depending on the circumstances, the following evidence may be useful:

• photos or video recordings of the place of the offence (for example, faded road markings, signs obscured by vegetation, missing speed limit signs);
• dash-cam recordings, showing the speed, signalling, the colour of the traffic light etc.;
• witnesses – passengers or other persons present who can confirm your version of events;
• technical documentation on the speed gun – certificate of approval and metrological verification, in line with applicable metrology standards for speed measuring devices;
• photo printouts or the video recording made by the device – which you can ask the court to order the police unit to produce;
• documents on traffic signs – diagrams from the road administrator, decisions of local authorities, photos of the signs etc.

In speeding cases, courts have repeatedly held that where the contravening person disputes the measurement, the burden to prove the accuracy and reliability of the report lies with the authority, especially where the contravention is detected with technical means (radar, fixed cameras). This is evident from numerous judgments analysed in legal doctrine and on specialised websites.

5.3. Drafting the contravention complaint

The contravention complaint is the document by which you ask the court to annul or alter the contravention report. It must contain the elements required by Article 194 of the Code of Civil Procedure (parties, object, factual and legal grounds, evidence) and clearly state what you request from the court.

Typically, a traffic contravention complaint should include:

• your data (name, domicile, personal identification number, phone number, e-mail address);
• the defendant authority – usually the county police inspectorate or the traffic unit indicated in the report;
• the identification data of the report – number, date, issuing authority;
• a brief description of the facts from your point of view;
• grounds of illegality (formal defects, absolute or relative nullities, late service etc.);
• grounds of lack of merit (the offence did not occur, was not committed by you, does not fall under the legal provision indicated, the sanction is disproportionate etc.);
• a clear request – annulment of the report, replacement of the fine by a warning (under Article 21 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001), reduction of the sanction, removal of the licence suspension etc.;
• evidence – attached documents, request to hear witnesses, request to order the defendant authority to produce the photo printouts, radar recordings etc.

In light of HCCJ Decision no. 16/2023, it is advisable to set out at least your main arguments within the 15-day time limit and then, if necessary, file additional written submissions before the first hearing to develop your reasoning or to invoke new case-law and evidence.

5.4. What happens in court

After the complaint is registered, the court serves it on the defendant authority (usually the police inspectorate) and sets a first hearing date. The procedure is, in principle, public and adversarial: both parties have the right to present arguments and evidence.

At the hearing, the judge first examines the legality of the report (whether it was drawn up in compliance with Articles 16 and 17 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001) and then its merits (whether the offence was committed and whether the sanction is proportionate, in the light of Articles 5 and 21 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 and the relevant provisions of GEO 195/2002).

The court may:

• uphold the report – the complaint is dismissed;
• annul the report – the complaint is allowed and the fine and any secondary measures (such as suspension of the licence) are removed;
• modify the report – for example, replacing the fine with a warning or reducing the sanction, under Article 21 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001;
• maintain the offence but change the legal classification or sanction, within the limits of the law.

The decision of the district court may normally be appealed, under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 34 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, insofar as the special law does not provide otherwise.

6. Practical examples: when it makes sense to challenge a traffic fine

The real chances of success always depend on the specific facts, but there are recurring types of cases in which complaints have had favourable outcomes for drivers.

6.1. Speeding measured by radar – signage issues or metrology defects

A significant number of complaints concern speeding offences detected by radar. These cases may have reasonable chances of success where:

• there was no speed limit sign at the legally required distance before the measuring point, in accordance with the Regulation approved by Government Decision no. 1391/2006;
• the sign was obscured or damaged (for example, covered by vegetation), and this can be proved with photos or video recordings;
• there is no evidence that the radar device was properly approved and subject to metrological verification at the time of measurement, although metrology rules require regular checks;
• there are doubts about the identification of the vehicle (for example, multiple cars appear in the image, or the registration number is not clearly visible).

Court decisions in many cases show that where contraventions are detected by technical means, the authority must prove the report’s reliability and accuracy, including by producing the photo printouts and metrology certificates. Where such evidence is lacking, doubts are resolved in favour of the driver.

6.2. Crossing a continuous line, failing to give way, running a red light

In these situations, usually observed directly by the police officer, it is often more difficult to challenge the facts, because the case is perceived as “the officer’s word” against the driver’s word. However, the chances can improve if:

• there are credible witnesses who were present and can state that you did not commit the offence or that there were critical mitigating circumstances (for example, a pedestrian suddenly stepping on the zebra crossing);
• you have video recordings (dash-cam or CCTV footage) contradicting what is written in the report;
• you can show that traffic signs were unclear or inadequate.

Case-law shows that a mere verbal challenge without additional evidence has limited chances of success, given that the report enjoys a presumption of legality and validity until proven otherwise.

6.3. Illegal parking and vehicle towing

In cases involving illegal parking and towing, the focus is sometimes more on administrative law (challenging the towing order) but contravention issues may also arise. Courts have held, for example, that towing must comply with the conditions laid down in local council decisions and the Regulation, and that failure to comply with these conditions can justify annulment of the measure or repayment of sums paid, as shown in numerous judgments available on case-law portals such as jurisprudenta.com and legeaz.net.

7. Costs, risks and effects on the driving licence

Many drivers hesitate to challenge a report because they are unsure about the costs and risks. Legally, it is important to distinguish between the effects of the fine, the effects on the driving licence and procedural costs.

7.1. Licence suspension and the effect of the complaint

For certain traffic contraventions – for example, exceeding the speed limit by more than 50 km/h, running a red light, failing to give way with serious consequences – GEO 195/2002 provides, in addition to the fine, a secondary measure of suspension of the right to drive, regulated in particular in Article 96 and following.

Under Article 32 paragraph (3) of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, the contravention complaint suspends enforcement of contravention sanctions. In practice this usually means that once you have filed a complaint within the legal time limit, the suspension of the licence should not be enforced until the case is finally decided (unless there is a special rule providing otherwise).

In practice, administrative handling may sometimes raise issues (for example, if the licence has already been surrendered or if the authorities interpret the law differently). It is therefore important to keep proof of filing the complaint and explicitly refer to Article 32 paragraph (3) of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 when corresponding with the traffic authorities.

7.2. Court fees and litigation costs

A significant advantage of contravention complaints is that they are exempt from judicial stamp duties, under Article 36 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001. This exemption also covers appeals (where available) and incidental procedural applications, as confirmed by court practice in contravention matters.

If you hire a lawyer, you will need to pay the lawyer’s fee. If the complaint is allowed, the court may order the defendant authority (usually the police inspectorate) to pay your litigation costs, including reasonable lawyer’s fees, under Article 453 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Conversely, if the complaint is dismissed, the court may order you to pay the defendant’s costs, although in practice such costs are often minimal or non-existent.

7.3. Repayment of the fine already paid

A common question is what happens to the sums paid if the report is annulled or the fine is replaced with a warning. Although Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 does not provide a detailed repayment procedure, court practice and fiscal rules show that, where the report is annulled, the person concerned may request repayment of the fine from the authority that collected it, via the tax procedure (repayment application).

Some judgments have held that a repayment request made directly in the contravention complaint is inadmissible, considering that repayment is a separate administrative procedure (see, for example, decisions discussed on legal-land.ro). In other cases, courts have explicitly ordered repayment of seized or paid sums where the report was annulled. In practice, it is important to keep proof of payment and, once the judgment is final, to submit a repayment request to the tax authority or institution that collected the fine.

8. Real chances of success and key influencing factors

There is no universal rule on the “probability of success” in a traffic contravention complaint. However, based on legislation and court practice, some factors clearly influence the outcome:

• the seriousness and type of offence – for example, a small speeding offence with no consequences is more likely to be converted into a warning than a serious violation with the speed doubled compared to the legal limit;
• the quality of the contravention report – a complete report with a clear description of the facts, indication of all mandatory elements and references to the evidence is harder to overturn than one containing obvious mistakes or major omissions;
• the existence of counter-evidence – photos, videos, witnesses and technical documents have far greater weight than mere statements of the driver;
• local case-law – practice varies among courts, even though High Court decisions (appeals in the interest of the law and preliminary rulings) aim to unify legal interpretation;
• the way the case is presented – a well-structured, legally argued complaint has better chances than a short, vague one with no clear grounds or evidence.

At the same time, some widespread myths should be avoided:

• “Any error in the report automatically leads to annulment” – false; as clarified by HCCJ Decision no. 13/2018, not every formal irregularity is an absolute nullity; the decisive factor is whether the defect has actually harmed your rights.
• “If I refuse to sign the report, it is invalid” – false; the report remains valid, and refusal to sign only triggers the obligation to serve it later by post or posting.
• “If I pay the fine, I can no longer challenge it” – generally false; payment of the fine does not automatically preclude filing a complaint within the legal time limit, although the specific procedural and repayment aspects need to be assessed case by case.

9. Paying half of the minimum fine within 15 days vs. challenging the report

Law no. 203/2018 amended the rules on the payment of contravention fines by introducing a general rule according to which the contravening person may pay half of the minimum fine provided by the law within 15 days, in which case the sanction is deemed executed in full.

In traffic matters, this mechanism is reflected in GEO 195/2002 (for example, in Articles 108 and 109) and subsequent implementing legislation, while the report must indicate the option to pay half of the minimum fine. Payment can now be made, among others, online via the national platform ghiseul.ro or through other electronic payment systems, in line with Government Ordinance no. 2/2001 and specific regulations.

It is important not to confuse the reduced payment time limit with the complaint time limit:

• reduced payment time limit – 15 days from the date of service of the report, according to Law no. 203/2018;
• complaint time limit – also 15 days from delivery or service, under Article 31 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001.

In practice, this means that you sometimes have to decide quickly whether to pay half of the fine or lodge a complaint, although the two options do not completely exclude one another: there are cases where drivers have paid the fine (to avoid enforcement or penalties) and at the same time challenged the report, later requesting repayment if the complaint was upheld.

10. Defence strategies in traffic contravention cases

Although every case has its specific features, a few general strategic lines can be identified for defence in traffic contravention cases:

• Checking the legality of the report – identifying possible absolute nullities (lack of the officer’s signature, lack of the date of the offence etc.) or relative nullities (incomplete description, lack of legal classification, failure to record objections etc.).
• Challenging the factual findings – showing, through evidence, that the offence did not occur, was not committed by you or does not meet the conditions of the legal provision invoked.
• Raising proportionality of the sanction – even where the offence is admitted, you may ask the court to replace the fine with a warning or reduce the sanction, under Articles 5 and 21 of Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, particularly for less serious offences and in the absence of prior contraventions.
• Using relevant case-law – referring to High Court decisions (appeals in the interest of the law and preliminary rulings) and case-law published on legal portals (universuljuridic.ro, legeaz.net, jurisprudenta.com) can strengthen your legal arguments.
• Adapting the defence to local practice – some courts are stricter or more flexible regarding certain offences; consulting a lawyer with experience in traffic contraventions can help tailor the defence to local case-law.

11. Conclusions

Challenging traffic contravention fines is not a mere formal exercise, but a complex legal procedure governed by special rules (Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, GEO 195/2002, the Regulation in Government Decision no. 1391/2006) and by the case-law of the High Court of Cassation and Justice.

Essentially, if you have received a fine or your driving licence has been suspended, you should assess, within the 15-day time limit:

• whether the report was drawn up legally (includes all mandatory elements and complies with service requirements);
• whether you have concrete evidence contradicting the facts recorded in the report (videos, photos, witnesses, technical documents);
• whether the sanction is proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and your personal circumstances;
• whether it is practically worthwhile to lodge a complaint (considering the amount of the fine, the importance of the licence for your work, as well as the costs and duration of the proceedings).

Even though not every complaint will succeed, the legislation and case-law do provide real tools for defending drivers’ rights, provided that the complaint is filed in time, properly structured and supported by appropriate legal arguments and evidence.