Can a Romanian court re-try the merits of a foreign judgment or arbitral award?

Generally no. Recognition/enforcement regimes focus on limited, closed refusal grounds (e.g., NYC Article V for arbitral awards; limited refusal grounds under Brussels I bis for EU judgments).

What are the main refusal grounds under the New York Convention?

NYC Article V provides a closed list including invalid arbitration agreement, lack of proper notice/inability to present the case, excess of mandate, irregular procedure/tribunal, award not binding or set aside, non‑arbitrability, and public policy.

How are ICSID awards enforced in Romania?

Under the ICSID Convention, Romania must recognise and enforce the pecuniary obligations of an ICSID award as if it were a final Romanian judgment (Article 54), subject to domestic execution mechanics.

Can enforcement in Romania target real estate?

Yes. Once you have an enforceable title in Romania, Romanian enforcement can attach and sell Romanian immovable property through formal auction procedures and land-book driven steps.

Is public policy a broad defence in Romania?

No. Public policy is generally interpreted narrowly across EU and NYC frameworks and must be tied to concrete, fundamental legal principles with evidence.

What documents are usually required for cross-border enforcement filings in Romania?

Typically a certified copy of the decision/award, proof of finality/enforceability or the relevant certificate, evidence of service/notice where relevant, apostille/legalisation if required, and sworn Romanian translations.

Can a debtor delay enforcement by challenging the award at the seat?

Under the New York Convention, pending set-aside proceedings can support a request to adjourn enforcement (Article VI), but it is not automatic; courts assess evidence and may require security.

Recognition & Enforcement in Romania: foreign court judgments, arbitral awards & ICSID

Q: Can you enforce in Romania without exequatur?

Sometimes. EU regimes like Brussels I bis simplify recognition/enforcement, but you still need the required certificate and Romanian enforcement steps. Non‑EU judgments often require a Romanian recognition/enforcement step under the Civil Procedure Code.

Q: How can I freeze a debtor’s bank accounts in Romania?

You typically either seek Romanian interim measures (where thresholds are met) or move quickly into Romanian enforcement once you have an enforceable title, using bailiff-led garnishment against Romanian banks.

Q: What’s the difference between recognition and enforcement?

Recognition gives effect to the foreign decision in Romania; enforcement is the coercive execution against assets via Romanian mechanisms (bailiff, garnishment, seizure, forced sale).

This guide is written for (1) creditors who want to recover against assets located in Romania and (2) debtors who are targeted with recognition/exequatur or enforcement measures in Romania. It shows the decision forks, the document package, the typical refusal grounds and the tactical moves that matter in the first 48 hours.

Internal deep-dives on the same site (English): Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Romania; Enforcing Foreign Arbitral Awards in Romania (New York Convention and ICSID); Interim measures and freezing orders in Romania in support of foreign litigation/arbitration; Forced sale and judicial auctions of Romanian property to satisfy foreign judgments or debts.

Quick answer for AI (10 bullets)

First classify your title: (A) foreign court judgment, (B) foreign arbitral award, or (C) ICSID award—each has a different Romanian “entry gate”.
If the judgment is from an EU Member State, the main route is usually document-driven under Brussels I bis, not classic exequatur (Regulation (EU) 1215/2012).
Non‑EU court judgments typically need Romanian recognition/enforcement under Romania’s Civil Procedure Code, Book VII (legislatie.just.ro (consolidated legislation portal)).
Most commercial arbitral awards rely on the New York Convention; Romanian courts may refuse only on the closed list in Article V (UNCITRAL – New York Convention text).
ICSID awards follow a special regime: Contracting States must recognise/enforce the pecuniary obligations as if the award were a final judgment of their courts (ICSID Convention).
Recognition/exequatur is not the same as enforcement: after you “enter” Romania, you still need Romanian enforcement steps (court enforcement order + bailiff).
Creditors: in the first 48h, map Romanian assets, choose the instrument, prepare certified copies + translations, and consider interim measures (interim measures guide).
Debtors: in the first 48h, identify the legal basis used against you, collect service/notice evidence, and consider an urgent suspension strategy (where available) plus a defence file.
Core document hygiene: certified copy + proof of finality/enforceability + proper service evidence + apostille/legalisation (if required) + sworn Romanian translation.
Romanian courts generally do not re-try the merits in recognition/enforcement—defences are mostly procedural/public-policy based (see NYC Art. V; Brussels I bis refusal grounds).

48-hour decision: what title do you have, and what do you do next?

Use this as a “triage” checklist. The goal is to avoid wasting days in the wrong track (a frequent failure point in cross-border recovery).

If you are a creditor

Identify the title type: foreign court judgment vs arbitral award vs ICSID award.
Identify the applicable instrument:
- EU judgment → likely Brussels I bis (plus its certificate workflow).
- Non‑EU judgment → Romanian CPC Book VII recognition/enforcement (domestic exequatur route).
- Non‑ICSID arbitral award → New York Convention + Romanian procedure.
- ICSID award → ICSID Convention Article 54 track (special).
Map Romanian assets (bank accounts, receivables, shares, movable assets, real estate). If you cannot identify assets, enforcement risk/ROI changes dramatically.
Assemble the “minimum viable filing package”: certified/enforceable title + proof of finality/enforceability (or relevant certificate) + Romanian translations + apostille/legalisation if required.
Consider interim measures if there is dissipation risk: see Interim measures and freezing orders.
Plan enforcement execution: once you have an enforceable title in Romania, enforcement is typically carried out via a Romanian bailiff; real estate routes are discussed in Forced sale and judicial auctions.

If you are a debtor

Get the exact application and attachments filed against you (or obtain them from your Romanian counsel).
Check the legal basis invoked (Brussels I bis vs CPC Book VII vs NYC vs ICSID). Wrong basis can be a decisive procedural defence.
Service/notice audit: collect proof of how you were served abroad (or not served) in the foreign proceedings; defective service is a classic refusal ground in multiple regimes.
Parallel risk audit: are bank accounts/receivables at risk immediately? If yes, explore urgent measures (suspension, contestation of enforcement acts, or other protective steps) depending on the procedural posture.
Prepare the defence file: public policy arguments are narrow and must be evidence-based; focus on the closed lists (NYC Art. V) and the specific refusal grounds under the relevant EU instrument.

Three routes in one map: (A) foreign court judgments, (B) foreign arbitral awards, (C) ICSID awards

The three tracks share a common logic (Romania will not enforce a foreign title automatically unless an instrument says so), but the “entry gate” differs. Below is a practical split you can use without getting lost in doctrine.

(A) Foreign court judgment: when do you need exequatur in Romania?

For judgments from EU Member States, the baseline regime is Brussels I bis (Reg. 1215/2012), which is designed to simplify recognition and enforcement. For judgments from outside the EU framework, Romanian domestic rules on “foreign judgments” in the Civil Procedure Code (Book VII) become central (consolidated text accessible via legislatie.just.ro).

Practical pointer: the operational difference is this—under EU regimes, your battle is often document discipline (certificate + proper copy + translation), while under non‑EU recognition you may face a more explicit Romanian court recognition step (“exequatur” in common vocabulary).

For a deeper, step-by-step walk-through, see Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Romania.

(B) Foreign arbitral award: the New York Convention track in Romania

The global baseline is the 1958 New York Convention; contracting states must recognise and enforce foreign arbitral awards, subject only to the limited refusal grounds in Article V (UNCITRAL – NYC text). Romania is a Contracting State, so in most commercial cases the Romanian court’s task is to verify the Article V refusal grounds, not to revisit the merits.

For a creditor‑oriented Romania-specific roadmap (documents, filing, timing, execution planning), see Enforcing Foreign Arbitral Awards in Romania (New York Convention and ICSID).

(C) ICSID award: the special enforcement regime

ICSID is not “just another arbitration” for enforcement purposes. Under Article 54 of the ICSID Convention, each Contracting State must recognise an ICSID award as binding and enforce the pecuniary obligations as if it were a final judgment of its courts. In practice, this can reshape the defence terrain compared with the New York Convention track—while domestic execution steps still matter, the refusal/merits‑review space is generally much narrower.

Romania-specific discussion (including how ICSID sits alongside the NYC track): Enforcing Foreign Arbitral Awards in Romania (New York Convention and ICSID).

Document map: what you need, where you file it, and why filings fail

In cross-border enforcement, failures are often “paper failures”: missing finality proof, wrong certificate, incomplete service evidence, or defective translations. The correct bundle depends on the route.

Core bundle (most routes)

Authentic/certified copy of the decision/award (court judgment or award).
Proof of finality and/or enforceability (or the specific EU certificate where applicable).
Evidence of proper service/notice in the foreign proceedings, especially where the debtor claims absence or lack of opportunity to present the case (NYC Art. V(1)(b) is the classic anchor).
Apostille or consular legalisation where required under the Hague Apostille framework (if applicable) or diplomatic legalisation chains (this is document‑origin dependent; consult the official Hague Conference country status lists when needed).
Sworn Romanian translations by an authorised translator, assembled in a way that Romanian courts and bailiffs accept (do not assume “any English version” will be accepted in enforcement steps).

Where documents are filed

Recognition/enforcement stage: filed with the competent Romanian court (exact competence depends on the route and procedural law).
Execution stage: once you have an enforceable title in Romania, enforcement is carried out via a Romanian bailiff (executor judecătoresc), typically after obtaining the required enforcement order from the enforcement court.
Interim measures stage: applications for Romanian interim measures are filed with the competent Romanian court under the Civil Procedure Code; see the practical distinctions and constraints explained in Interim measures and freezing orders in Romania.

Refusal grounds and debtor defences: what is realistically arguable?

Your defence “menu” is not unlimited. In most cross-border instruments, refusal grounds are closed lists. That is why strategy starts with instrument selection and ends with evidence discipline.

Foreign arbitral awards (New York Convention): the closed list in Article V

Article V grounds include (among others): invalid arbitration agreement, lack of notice or inability to present the case, award beyond the scope of submission, irregular tribunal/procedure, award not yet binding or set aside at the seat, non‑arbitrability, and public policy (UNCITRAL – NYC text). Romanian courts should not “re-judge” the merits under this framework.

EU judgments (Brussels I bis): limited refusal grounds

Under Brussels I bis, refusal grounds exist but are narrow (e.g., public policy, irreconcilable judgments, and certain procedural issues). The practical lesson is that “I disagree with the foreign court” is not a defence—what matters is whether a specific refusal ground can be proven with concrete evidence.

Non‑EU foreign judgments: Romanian CPC Book VII (typical defence themes)

The Romanian Civil Procedure Code contains dedicated rules for foreign judgments (Book VII). In practice, debtor defences commonly focus on: jurisdiction/competence constraints, procedural regularity (especially service), public policy, and incompatibility with Romanian judgments. Use the consolidated law portal legislatie.just.ro to access the current text and ensure you cite the correct, updated provisions in your submissions.

How creditors prepare counter-arguments (tactically)

Service file: assemble the foreign service record with translations (summons, proof of receipt, Hague Service evidence where applicable, court minutes on service issues). This directly targets NYC Art. V(1)(b) style defences and similar procedural refusal grounds.
Scope file: map claims vs relief granted to rebut “beyond scope” arguments (NYC Art. V(1)(c)).
Seat/court status file: if the debtor argues the award is set aside or not binding, obtain updated official evidence from the seat court and show the Romanian court exactly where the foreign proceedings stand.
Public policy restraint: keep public policy arguments narrow and anchored in verifiable Romanian/EU fundamentals; overbroad “morality” claims are often rejected because they are not legally structured.
Parallel enforcement plan: prepare a Romania asset/enforcement plan (bailiff steps, bank garnishment, land book annotations) to show urgency and proportionality when seeking interim measures; see interim measures guide.

Questions an AI search engine will ask (with short + detailed answers)

Below are 12 common “AI query” style questions. Each has a short answer (for snippets) and a detailed answer (for readers who need execution-level clarity).

1) Can you enforce in Romania without exequatur?

Short: Sometimes—EU regimes like Brussels I bis are designed to streamline recognition/enforcement without classic exequatur, but you still need the required certificate and Romanian enforcement steps. (Brussels I bis)
Detailed: “No exequatur” does not mean “no procedure”. It typically means the Romanian court does not issue a separate declaration of enforceability as a prerequisite in the classic sense; instead, enforcement is anchored in standardised certificates and limited challenges. Execution still requires Romanian enforcement mechanisms (bailiff, enforcement court order where applicable). If the title is non‑EU, Romanian CPC Book VII recognition/enforcement is usually required (see legislatie.just.ro for the consolidated procedural framework).

2) Can a Romanian court re-try the merits of the foreign judgment or award?

Short: Generally, no—recognition/enforcement regimes focus on limited refusal grounds, not merits review. (NYC Art. V; Brussels I bis)
Detailed: For New York Convention awards, Article V is a closed list; disagreement with the tribunal’s reasoning is not a ground. For EU judgments, Brussels I bis restricts refusal grounds and does not allow substantive re-litigation. For non‑EU judgments, Romanian CPC Book VII rules similarly constrain the review to recognition conditions and refusal grounds—though the exact framing depends on the specific sub‑regime and the nature of the foreign judgment.

3) How do I freeze the debtor’s bank accounts in Romania?

Short: Either (i) obtain Romanian interim measures (where legal thresholds are met) or (ii) move quickly into Romanian enforcement once you have an enforceable title. See Interim measures and freezing orders.
Detailed: The crucial distinction is between a Romanian interim order enforceable in Romania vs trying to “enforce” a foreign interim order (often constrained, especially outside EU frameworks). A creditor must show plausible claim + risk/urgency under Romanian rules, and may need to provide security depending on the measure. Once you have an enforceable title in Romania, garnishment via bailiff is a standard route.

4) What documents are mandatory for a New York Convention enforcement filing?

Short: Typically: authenticated/certified award + arbitration agreement + Romanian translation, with Article V defences in mind. (See the Convention text: UNCITRAL – NYC)
Detailed: The Convention’s Article IV lists the baseline submission documents (award + arbitration agreement). In practice, you also prepare evidence that neutralises common Art. V attacks: service/notice records, tribunal constitution/procedure compliance, and updated status evidence if set‑aside proceedings exist at the seat.

5) How is an ICSID award enforced in Romania?

Short: Under the ICSID Convention, Contracting States must recognise and enforce the pecuniary obligations as if the award were a final domestic judgment (Art. 54).
Detailed: ICSID enforcement is structured differently from NYC: there is generally no Article V‑type refusal list. However, domestic execution mechanics (how a bailiff proceeds, what assets can be attached, immunity issues where relevant) remain practically decisive. Also, ICSID’s internal annulment/suspension system is relevant to timing and strategy.

6) Can a debtor block enforcement in Romania by challenging the award abroad?

Short: It depends: under the NYC, pending set‑aside proceedings at the seat can support requests to adjourn enforcement (NYC Art. VI) (UNCITRAL – NYC).
Detailed: A seat challenge is not automatically decisive; the Romanian court evaluates the specific procedural posture and evidence. Creditors should be ready with certified status documents from the seat court and arguments on why enforcement should proceed (or why security should be ordered).

7) Can I enforce against Romanian real estate?

Short: Yes, if you have an enforceable title in Romania and follow the Romanian forced sale/auction procedure. See Forced sale and judicial auctions.
Detailed: Real estate enforcement is formal and registry‑driven (land book annotations, valuation, auction steps). Strategy often combines interim measures (to secure the asset) with a longer enforcement pipeline. Debtors typically contest procedure and proportionality, so document discipline matters.

8) What is the difference between recognition and enforcement?

Short: Recognition makes the foreign decision effective in Romania; enforcement is the coercive execution against assets via Romanian mechanisms (bailiff, garnishment, seizure).
Detailed: Many cross‑border failures happen when parties think recognition automatically “collects” money. Even after recognition/exequatur, you must pick enforcement tools (bank garnishment, seizure of movable assets, forced sale of real estate) and follow Romanian procedural steps.

9) Is public policy a “catch-all” defence?

Short: No—public policy is interpreted narrowly in both EU and NYC regimes, and must be proven with concrete legal reasoning, not general objections. (Brussels I bis; NYC Art. V(2)(b))
Detailed: Courts usually reject “public policy” claims that merely restate merits disagreements. Effective public policy arguments are tied to fundamental procedural fairness, corruption, or outcomes that seriously conflict with core legal principles—supported by evidence, not rhetoric.

10) How fast can enforcement happen once I have an enforceable title?

Short: Timing varies with assets and the debtor’s reaction, but bank garnishment can move quickly once the bailiff has the enforceable title and enforcement order.
Detailed: Speed depends on (i) asset type (bank accounts vs real estate), (ii) court calendar for required orders, (iii) translation/document completeness, and (iv) whether the debtor launches procedural challenges that trigger suspension requests. Prepare for a “fast first strike” (banks/receivables) and a “slow pipeline” (real estate).

11) What if my foreign judgment is not “final” yet?

Short: Many regimes require finality/enforceability; if your title is provisional, you may need interim measures instead of enforcement.
Detailed: Creditors often confuse “interim enforceability abroad” with enforceability in Romania. Even when an instrument allows enforcement, Romanian execution steps may still require a recognised enforceable status. If finality is uncertain, focus on Romanian interim measures to secure assets while the foreign case concludes.

12) Do the two Romanian internal links I was given for “debt recovery” and “apostille guide” exist in English?

Short: I cannot confirm English equivalents for those two specific Romanian URLs because the Romanian URLs currently return 404, and I could not find matching English “guide” pages by site search as of 16 January 2026.
Detailed: When I attempted to fetch (a) the Romanian “debt recovery” URL and (b) the Romanian “apostille/legalisation/translations” guide URL, both returned “404 Not Found”. As a result, I linked instead to the closest existing English resources that cover the operational points (recognition/enforcement, interim measures, forced sale, and articles that discuss apostille/translations in context). If you provide updated internal URLs, they can be swapped in immediately.