Thought Articles

Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in The Intellectual Property Review - Edition 5 (published in May 2016 – editor Robert L Baechtold). The Romanian legal framework on IP rights has been gradually harmonised with the corresponding European legislation (relevant EU Directives and EU Regulations) and, generally, with the principles provided in international treaties and conventions.

This article was first published in Romanian language on Hotnews.ro by Alexandru Mănucu, Tax Senior Consultant of Țuca Zbârcea & Asociații Tax One of the major tax implications of Brexit may apply to the income tax of British residents in Romania. While the architecture of the future agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union (EU) is yet to be determined, its potential impact illustrates a burdensome level of duties and taxes that could keep British investors very far away from Romania following Brexit.

Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in The Government Procurement Review, 4th edition (published in May 2016 – editors Jonathan Davey and Amy Gatenby). Public procurement contracts are essentially regulated by Government Emergency Ordinance No. 34/2006 on the award of public procurement contracts, public works concession contracts and service concession contracts (GEO No. 34/2006). Specific sector regulation and clarifications of GEO No. 34/2006 can be found in the secondary and tertiary legislation, consisting of government decisions and National Agency for Public Procurement (ANAP) (former National Authority for the Regulation and Monitoring of Public Procurement) orders. GEO No. 34/2006 transposes the EU legislation on public procurement and creates the legal framework to secure compliance with the principles of contract awarding in public procurement: non-discrimination, equal treatment, mutual recognition, transparency, proportionality, optimum use of funds and undertaking of liability.

Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in The Corporate Governance Review – Edition 6 (published in March 2016 – editor Willem J L Calkoen). Law No. 31/1990 on companies, republished in 2004 and further amended and completed (the Companies Law) and the Capital Market Law No. 297/2004, as further amended and completed (the Capital Market Law), represent the primary sources of law relating to the corporate governance of listed companies in Romania. In addition, as an independent state agency, the securities regulator, the Financial Supervisory Authority (ASF) may issue legally binding regulations and other secondary enactments. Furthermore, Government Emergency Ordinance No. 109/2011 concerning the corporate governance of public enterprises (GEO No. 109/2011) sets out specific statutory rules for the corporate governance of enterprises controlled by the Romanian State (a significant number of the targeted companies that are listed on the Romanian regulated markets or that are envisaged for listing in the near future).

Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in The Dispute Resolution Review - Edition 8 (published in February 2016 – editor Jonathan Cotton) Disputes in Romania are settled in court in the vast majority of cases, under procedures regulated mainly by the new Civil Procedure Code (CPC). Entered into force on 15 February 2013, the CPC accomplished a systemic and extensive overhaul of the Romanian dispute resolution model. With a specific focus on acceleration of trial proceedings, the new regulation has reformed both the schedule and the content of proceedings taking place in various phases of the lawsuit, while attempting to clarify many of the controversies raised by interpretable provisions in the former regulation. The system is designed to ensure a double-level jurisdiction, with local courts, tribunals or courts of appeal acting as first instances depending on the nature and value of the litigation, while the High Court of Cassation and Justice acts exclusively as a court of last resort, also settling requests for unification of practice.

Reproduced by kind permission of LexisNexis - Lexis®PSL Competition. The latest amendments to the merger rules were introduced in January 2016 and concern the value of the authorisation taxes (ie fee paid on clearance) of economic concentrations applied by the Romanian Competition Council (RCC). Also, in January 2016 amendments regarding the impact of the assessment performed by the Council of National Defense (SCND) were introduced. Where the SCND notifies the RCC that an economic concentration is likely to present a risk for national defence, the deadlines set out under the merger rules are suspended as of that notification date.