Please note that I offer legal consultancy ONLY at the office and for a fee. The phone number is for appointments only. Thank you!
Legal blog
Up-to-date information on mediation, legislation and legal practice.
In Decision no. 10/2026, Romania's High Court of Cassation and Justice ruled that when interdiction is replaced with special guardianship and the deterioration of mental faculties is permanent, special guardianship may last up to 15 years — compared with the 5 years applied until now.
A defendant with mental disorders received psychotropic treatment in pre-trial detention for 4 months on the basis of an expired medical letter. Relying on Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention, I obtained the replacement of pre-trial detention with judicial supervision.
I answer the most frequent questions received after my article on the special curator: when it can be requested, whether it depends on the main action, whether it can be requested orally or ordered by the court of its own motion, and why it should be decided urgently.
In the context of the relocation of over 400 vulnerable persons from Bihor County, I explain who has standing to ask the court to establish a protective measure under Law 140/2022 and Articles 165 and 111 of the Romanian Civil Code.
After reviewing the case-law of the courts in Ilfov County, I found that in the 3 years since Law 140/2022 came into force, not a single case has provisionally appointed a special curator. Here is when and how this measure can be requested.
Although required by law, ANPD did not draft the report evaluating the impact of Law 140/2022 on persons with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities.
Summary of the Committee of Ministers' conclusions (09–11 June 2026) on the execution of ECHR judgments concerning persons with intellectual and psycho-social disabilities and the re-examination of guardianship measures under Law 140/2022.
A review three years after Law 140/2022 entered into force: only 43% of the 18,120 re-examination cases have been resolved, with significant ambiguity remaining.
The ECHR found a violation of Article 5 § 1 (e) of the Convention: the applicant did not effectively participate in the proceedings leading to her involuntary commitment and did not benefit from an effective defence.
The mediation agreement remains a valid solution when withdrawal of a criminal complaint can no longer be confirmed by the prosecutor.
