Cross-Border Jurisdictional Protocol
Romania has lodged no objection to any of the Article 10 alternative channels, and its official filing with the Hague Conference states that no translation is required for Central Authority service — an unusually permissive position among the European jurisdictions covered here. Romania's Ministry of Justice, through its Judicial Cooperation Unit, is the designated Central Authority, coordinating service through local courts or a Romanian bailiff (executor judecătoresc). A U.S. court in Micula v. Government of Romania rejected Romania's own argument that courier service under Article 10(a) was invalid, finding service proper under both the postal channel and the formal Central Authority route.
Since Romania has not objected to Article 10(a), courier or postal service is a valid, faster alternative — an approach a U.S. court upheld even after Romania itself argued otherwise.
Discuss postal or courier service options →We submit requests to Romania's Ministry of Justice, Judicial Cooperation Unit, which arranges execution through a local court or bailiff (executor judecătoresc).
Request Central Authority submission →Since Romania has not objected to Article 10(b), direct engagement of a Romanian bailiff can offer a faster path than the full Central Authority process.
Discuss direct bailiff service →Complete National Jurisdiction
Active network of local agents, court officers, and Central Authority specialists covering every administrative region.
All international document handoffs are executed pursuant to local sovereignty statutes and returned with court-certified evidentiary declarations.
Judicial Knowledge Base
Yes. Romania has not objected to Article 10(a), and a U.S. federal court in Micula v. Government of Romania upheld courier service under this provision even when Romania itself disputed its validity.
No. Romania's official filing with the Hague Conference states that translation is not required for formal Central Authority service, an unusually permissive position.
The Ministry of Justice, through its Judicial Cooperation Unit within the Division of International Treaties and Law.
Yes. Since Romania has not objected to Article 10(b), direct engagement of a Romanian bailiff (executor judecătoresc) is a valid faster alternative to the Central Authority route.
Only on their own nationals — Romania has objected to Article 8 for service on non-nationals through diplomatic or consular channels.
Consult with our international legal support specialists about service of process in Romania.