Building Permit Review: architectural plans and an indexed permit dossier on a Romanian legal-office desk.

Building Permit Application in Romania: Legal Review Before Filing

ROMANIAN CONSTRUCTION & REAL ESTATE COUNSEL

A building-permit application can be technically impressive and still be commercially unready. Before a developer commits to a construction start, funding drawdown or tenant opening date, the title, urbanism certificate, project, endorsements and transaction documents need to tell the same story.

Considering a filing?

Atrium can review the legal side of a Romanian building-permit file alongside your architect and technical team: the applicant’s right to build, the planning and endorsement route, documentary inconsistencies, transition issues under the 2026 Urbanism and Construction Code, and the conditions in the contracts that depend on authorisation. The output is a prioritised issue list and a filing decision, not a promise that an authority will grant a permit.

PROJECT REVIEW

Request a building-permit file review

Send the urbanism certificate, land-book extract, project index and endorsement status for a scoped first assessment.

Discuss a pre-filing review
PORTFOLIO SUPPORT

Discuss ongoing legal support

For developers handling repeated acquisitions, planning files and construction milestones, ask about a continuing legal contact for the project pipeline.

Discuss ongoing support

Is your building-permit file ready for a legal review?

A useful review begins with the project stage. The legal questions differ if the plot has not been acquired, a valid certificate was issued under the previous legislation, an application is almost ready, or the authority has already requested corrections.

Choose the position closest to your project. The panel changes to show the first documents and commercial decision to examine. It is a triage aid; it does not determine whether a permit must be issued.

Project stage selector

Select a stage to see the legal review route.

Before you buy or commit

Obtain the current land-book and cadastral extracts, planning position, access evidence, utility assumptions and a precise description of the proposed use. Ask whether the seller actually holds the rights, certificates or endorsements being marketed. The immediate commercial task is to connect the proposed price and closing timetable to a realistic authorisation route. A statement that a plot is “buildable” does not, by itself, establish that the proposed works can be authorised under the applicable planning, title, access, infrastructure and endorsement requirements.

Which law governs a Romanian building-permit application now?

Law no. 169/2026 enacted the Code on territorial planning, urbanism and construction. It was published in Official Gazette no. 661 on 10 August 2026. Under Article 575, it entered into force 15 days later, on 25 August 2026. Article 576(3) repealed Law no. 50/1991 and Law no. 350/2001 on entry into force, subject to the Code’s transitional provisions. A current filing should therefore start with the Code rather than an old checklist that treats Law no. 50/1991 as the ordinary live permitting regime.

The transition is more nuanced than a simple change of label. Article 582(1) keeps certain procedures for preparing, endorsing and approving planning documents that began before entry into force under the law applicable when they were initiated, while paragraph (2) permits a simplified route for some outstanding endorsements. Under paragraph (4), urbanism certificates issued earlier retain their validity; paragraphs (4) and (5) also address the authority competent to issue a later permit where responsibilities change. These rules should not be read as a blanket instruction to process every later permit application under the previous law. Counsel should identify the type and date of each step, the certificate’s continuing validity and the applicable issuing authority.

Check the Code on Romania’s Legislative Portal, the applicable certificate, approved planning documentation and the authority’s operative submission requirements for the specific site. The State Inspectorate for Construction’s legislation page also lists the 2026 Code. Article 575(2) expressly states that application of the Code is not conditional on secondary or tertiary legislation. That rule is separate from the practical availability of forms, implementing procedures or a digital filing platform. Confirm the filing channel and documentary requirements with the competent authority for the specific project.

What does a pre-filing legal review actually test?

The review is a decision tool for the investor, not a second architectural project. Article 262 lists at least the application; recent cadastral and land-book extracts and, where applicable, evidence of the right allowing construction; the project registration evidence explained by the Romanian Order of Architects for buildings; the project for authorising construction; relevant complementary documentation; environmental acts and other required endorsements; certain neighbour-related studies where relevant; the estimate, timing and value of the investment; and applicable project-verification reports. Article 263 specifies information to be included in the application, including the applicant, property, certificate, designer, proposed works and urban-planning parameters. These are not interchangeable documents.

First, the applicant’s right to build. The name on the application should be compared with the land book, the actual title or other right relied upon and the proposed contractual structure. The National Agency for Cadastre and Land Registration’s online service provides access to land-book and cadastral documents. Article 245 and Article 248, read with Article 262, require the applicant’s legal entitlement to fit the proposed works. Ownership is not the only possible basis, but rights of claim support construction only in the cases and conditions provided by law, including specified temporary works, repairs and non-structural interior works with the owner’s consent. A standard lease or development agreement does not automatically entitle its holder to build a permanent new structure. Check the right’s scope, duration, evidence and necessary consents before relying on it. A share deal may leave the property-owning company unchanged; an asset deal may introduce a new applicant. The timing of that change can affect the file.

Second, the planning position. The certificate of urbanism and approved plans must be read against the actual design brief. A project advertised as residential, logistics or mixed use may encounter different restrictions on function, setbacks, height, access, parking or protected status. Counsel should flag any discrepancy between contractual assumptions and the applicable planning documents for the architect and urban planner to resolve. The certificate’s effect depends on its type, content, issue date, validity and applicable planning documents. Under Article 253(2), a certificate does not itself confer the right to execute works or assure approval of a later design.

Third, the endorsement route. Article 266 links required opinions and approvals to the site’s location, complexity, risk and type of work, with the list communicated through the certificate. Article 269 sets rules for obtaining certain opinions through the single-agreement commission and for other routes, with exceptions and conditions. A timeline that treats every endorsement as identical is unreliable. Review which authority issues each item, whether the supporting documentation is ready, what conditions have been imposed and whether an earlier planning-stage opinion remains usable at permit stage under the precise conditions of the Code.

Fourth, the technical-to-legal handover. Article 264 requires the project for authorising construction to comply with applicable planning and technical rules and to be prepared and signed by the responsible specialists. The lawyer should not certify structural design, fire calculations or a geotechnical study. The lawyer can, however, compare the versions submitted to different bodies, identify a legal condition omitted from the project brief and ensure the investor understands what the specialist must confirm. A coherent file has one controlled version of the location, function, area, elevations and proposed works across the application and its annexes.

Pre-filing decision map: what the document means for the investment
Review pointDocument to compareBusiness exposureDecision before filing
Land book, cadastral plan, title or other qualifying right, applicant detailsThe intended applicant may lack the necessary legal basis for the proposed works.Confirm the right and any transaction step needed before submission.
Urbanism certificate, approved planning rules, current design briefA redesign may affect usable area, tenant requirements or price.Resolve the planning gap with the architect and update the financial model.
Certificate list, application history, issued opinions and conditionsAn assumed clearance may be missing, expired, conditional or irrelevant.Assign an owner and evidence for every required route.
SPA or lease, financing term sheet, construction programmeA fixed closing, rent or drawdown date may arrive before authorisation.Align conditions, long-stop dates and termination rights with real dependencies.
Dates of earlier certificate, planning steps, prior correspondenceThe parties may cite the wrong statute or approach the wrong authority.Document the applicable route under Article 582 and identify the issuer.
Right to buildVerify who will apply, the legal right permitting the proposed works and any closing step needed to put that right in place.

When should a developer bring counsel in?

The most valuable moment is often before a land purchase, long lease or major design spend becomes unconditional. If the economic model assumes a particular gross floor area, use class, delivery date or street access, ask for a legal review of those assumptions while the contract still has room for conditions precedent. Real estate due diligence should connect title and encumbrances to the actual permit strategy, rather than deliver a land-book report in isolation.

For a purchase, identify exactly what is being acquired: land with no certificate, a certificate, a planning approval, an application in progress or an issued permit. Define who owns the designs and studies, whether their use can be transferred, who will answer authority requests and who bears the cost of a required redesign. If the buyer’s desired use depends on a planning change or endorsement, a vague “subject to obtaining permits” clause may not allocate the risk adequately. The condition should identify the permit or objective standard, the responsible party, a workable long-stop date and the consequences if the desired authorisation is not obtained.

A lease for a retail, industrial or hospitality site adds a different issue: the build-out approval and the business’s operating approval can be separate legal tracks. The landlord may own the shell while the tenant bears fit-out obligations and an opening deadline. Counsel should map the permitted use, responsibility for works, access to plans, landlord consents and rent commencement against the required construction and operational approvals. The local operating-approval guide addresses the distinct municipal trading authorisation; neither approval should be presented as a substitute for the other.

Funding documents and development contracts deserve the same alignment. A lender may require a valid permit before first drawdown. A contractor may assume unobstructed site access by a fixed date. A forward purchaser or tenant may have remedies if the project is delayed. The review should translate permit uncertainty into conditions, evidence requirements, extension mechanics and reporting obligations. It should also assign a person to monitor the certificate’s validity and any expiry or condition attached to an endorsement.

How do the new filing and clarification rules affect the timetable?

Article 270 provides for submission to the competent authority or, after it becomes operational, the national one-stop desk. It permits written or digital filing and contains signature rules for digital documents. Do not assume a platform feature is already operational for a particular municipality. Confirm the local filing channel and preserve the submission receipt, versioned index and proof of every transmitted annex.

Article 271(1) requires the authority, when it finds the documentation incomplete or requiring technical clarification or modification, to notify the applicant in writing of all identified deficiencies within a maximum of ten working days from registration. The notice sets a completion period of no more than three months from receipt. Under paragraph (3), that cap does not apply when the requested change concerns acts of the environmental authority; the authority must set a period allowing the applicant to obtain the necessary completion. Article 273(1) provides a maximum of 30 calendar days for issuance from submission of complete documentation. Under paragraph (3), where the applicant opts for the final single agreement through the commission, that period runs from issuance of the agreement. Paragraph (2) provides a requested urgent procedure of up to seven working days, for which the local authority may charge a special fee. These statutory periods are procedural benchmarks, not guaranteed approval or opening dates; their operation depends on the complete file, endorsements, lawful clarification requests and the project’s history.

When a notice arrives, prepare a response matrix: each deficiency; the document or explanation that addresses it; the responsible architect, engineer, environmental consultant or lawyer; and the deadline supported by proof of receipt. If the authority asks for something apparently outside the certificate or the law, record the basis of the request and obtain a reasoned response rather than silently changing the project. If an item is genuinely missing, file a corrected version with an index that makes the change easy to locate. Article 273 addresses what happens when documentation is not completed within the set period and the possibility of completing and resubmitting during the certificate’s validity.

A permit and a site start are different decisions.

Article 264(5)–(6) distinguishes the project used for authorisation from the technical execution project and prohibits starting construction without the latter, except where the Code provides otherwise. Article 246(3) also ties the start of authorised works to the technical execution project, subject to Code exceptions. Before starting, confirm the execution documentation, applicable statutory notifications, site-management requirements and project-specific permit conditions. A positive permit decision does not replace them.

Can silence on an endorsement rescue a delayed application?

The Code includes a conditional tacit-endorsement mechanism under Article 269(14)–(16); it does not apply to every opinion or approval. It depends on the applicable route and deadline, a complete and correct file, and whether the issuer requested clarification or issued a reasoned rejection in time. Paragraph (15) excludes opinions from the specified defence, public-order and national-security institutions from tacit issuance. Paragraph (16) addresses the filing evidence and beneficiary declaration needed where the authorisation procedure continues without an express opinion. When the paragraph (14) conditions are met and the beneficiary validly invokes tacit approval, that paragraph says a later-issued opinion has no legal effect. Environmental, heritage and other specialist requirements still need review under their applicable procedures. Do not infer from silence alone that every missing approval exists.

Most importantly, an endorsement treated as granted is not the building permit. The application must still satisfy the Code’s requirements, the project must comply with applicable planning and technical law, and the competent authority must determine the permit application. If an endorsement has substantive safety, heritage or environmental implications, ask the technical team to verify compliance even where a procedural rule may allow the authorisation process to continue. The commercial cost of a later challenge can exceed the time saved by a poorly evidenced tacit-approval argument.

Representative Experience: A permit-dependent commercial opening

The situation. Atrium advised a company after a Romanian local authority refused the operating approval required for a new commercial location. The proposed opening depended on that municipal authorisation, and the business had already undertaken a significant lease commitment with a planned launch timetable.

Our work. The lawyers reviewed the refusal, the applicable provisions of OG no. 99/2000, the local council rules and the documents submitted with the application. The work included regulatory due diligence, analysis of available remedies, document review and advice on the commercial and timing consequences. The review distinguished requirements that needed evidence or clarification from risks embedded in the client’s opening plan.

Why it matters here. That matter concerned an operating approval, not an application for a building permit. It illustrates a recurring development issue: a lease, design and opening programme may depend on several different public-law approvals. For a construction project, a pre-filing legal review should identify each separate authorisation, its responsible party and its place in the contract timetable. We do not suggest that this operating-approval engagement establishes a particular result for a construction-permit application.

This anonymised description omits client-identifying information and does not set out every aspect of the matter or any litigation outcome. Past engagements do not predict future outcomes; each matter depends on its own facts, documents and applicable law.

What should management send for a first review?

A focused first instruction saves time. Send what already exists and mark what is missing; do not postpone contact until the application looks perfect. Atrium can scope a single-file review or discuss ongoing legal support for a portfolio. The architect and specialist consultants remain responsible for their respective technical designs and certifications.

Site and rights

Land-book and cadastral extracts, acquisition or lease documents, easements, co-owner arrangements and the identity of the intended applicant.

Planning and design

The urbanism certificate, approved planning references, current project brief, project for authorising construction and a document index with version dates.

Approvals and schedule

All issued or pending endorsements, authority correspondence, environmental position, desired filing and opening dates, and the contract milestones linked to the permit.

State the business decision in one sentence: “We want to sign for this land next month,” “We need to file before a lender condition expires,” or “The authority has asked for a response by a certain date.” That allows counsel to prioritise the issues that affect the decision, rather than produce a general recital of the statute. A first review can identify documents to obtain, questions for the architect, contract clauses to adjust and whether a more detailed opinion is necessary.

For repeat projects, a continuing arrangement can cover the recurring legal layer: early site screens, certificate and title checks, contract milestone review, tracking of formal authority correspondence and coordination with the specialist team. The appropriate scope depends on the number and type of active sites. Atrium’s real estate practice can discuss the mix of one-off and ongoing legal support for companies that fits the pipeline.

Frequently asked questions

Does a certificate of urbanism guarantee a building permit?

No. It identifies the planning and documentary framework applicable to the proposed works. The application, qualifying right, project and relevant endorsements must still meet the Code and site-specific requirements.

Can a certificate issued before the 2026 Code still be used?

Article 582(4) preserves the validity of certificates issued before the Code entered into force. Check the certificate’s own validity, the earlier file, outstanding endorsements and the competent issuing authority. It does not automatically place every later permit application under the old law.

Is the statutory 30-day period a guaranteed approval date?

No. Article 273(1) measures its general period from complete documentation, while paragraph (3) starts that period from issuance of the final single agreement where that route is chosen. A clarification notice, outstanding endorsement or other applicable procedure affects the practical timetable.

Can our company rely on a tacit endorsement and start works?

Article 269 may treat certain endorsements as granted if its conditions are met, with exclusions. That does not itself grant a building permit or satisfy the requirements for starting construction. The precise documents, filing evidence and technical obligations need separate review.

Should the architect or a lawyer handle the file?

Both roles can be necessary. The architect and engineers prepare and certify technical documentation. Counsel reviews the right to build, statutory route, legal consistency, authority correspondence and the contracts or financing commitments tied to authorisation.

Related Guides

NEXT PROJECT DECISION

Review the file before the commercial deadline becomes fixed

Share the certificate, title and document index. We can discuss a defined pre-filing review or continuing legal support across multiple Romanian sites.

Contact Atrium

Disclaimer: This page provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice, a legal opinion or the creation of a lawyer-client relationship. Legal solutions depend on the specific facts and documents involved.

AI Notice: AI-assisted content.

Term-sheet documents on a law-office table overlooking Bucharest, illustrating a Romanian company acquisition.

Negotiating a Term Sheet for a Romanian Company Acquisition

Romanian M&A · Pre-acquisition negotiation

The first signed document in a Romanian company acquisition can shape the price, timetable and negotiating leverage long before the share purchase agreement is ready. A term sheet should tell both sides what they are exploring, what remains open and which limited commitments take effect immediately.

In brief: Identify the buyer, seller, target and proposed transaction before discussing a headline price. State precisely which provisions are binding, especially confidentiality, exclusivity, costs and dispute resolution, and which commercial terms remain subject to due diligence and final documents. Define the valuation assumptions, access to information, necessary approvals and a realistic process timetable. Review the target’s company form and articles of association early. A term sheet can help a deal move faster, but careless drafting can create an unintended commitment or an expensive exclusivity period.

Need a term sheet reviewed before signature?

A focused review can usually start with the proposed term sheet, the target’s company form, the proposed ownership percentage, the latest accounts and the intended signing date. Atrium can identify the clauses that are binding now, the commercial assumptions that need definition and the Romanian-law checks that affect the transaction timetable.

A brief description of the parties and proposed deal is enough for an initial enquiry. Sensitive financial or employee files can follow through an agreed secure process.

What does a term sheet do in a Romanian company acquisition?

A term sheet records the principal negotiating parameters before the definitive acquisition documents are prepared. Its legal effect depends on the actual wording and parties’ conduct, rather than its title alone.

It may be called a letter of intent, memorandum of understanding, heads of terms or indicative offer. The useful question is not which label appears at the top. Ask whether it is a framework for continuing discussions, a set of immediately enforceable process obligations, or a commitment to enter into a future transaction on sufficiently settled terms. Romanian Civil Code rules on negotiations, confidentiality and promises to contract make that distinction important.

This article concentrates on a private acquisition of shares or social parts in a Romanian company, particularly an SRL (limited liability company). For an SRL the interests are părți sociale and the owners are asociați; an SA has shares (acțiuni) and shareholders (acționari). “Share purchase agreement” or SPA is a common international deal label; the definitive instrument for an SRL must reflect the actual transfer of social parts. An acquisition of specified assets, a minority investment, a joint venture or a regulated-company takeover can require a different document set and approval analysis. Our guide to the Romanian share purchase agreement covers warranties, conditions, closing and post-signing risk allocation in the later contract. The term sheet should set the negotiating direction without trying to replace that work.

The best early draft also names the real decision-makers. A founder might be negotiating, while another shareholder must approve the sale. A parent might propose to buy, while a different group company will sign the SPA. Identifying the parties avoids vague promises that cannot be carried into final documents without reopening the commercial deal.

Which term-sheet provisions can bind the parties?

A clearly drafted term sheet can leave the proposed sale non-binding while making specified process clauses binding. Each binding clause should be identified expressly, with its parties, start date, duration and consequences.

Article 1183 of the Romanian Civil Code recognises freedom to begin, continue and end negotiations, subject to good faith. Starting or continuing talks without a genuine intention to conclude a contract is an example of conduct contrary to good faith. Ending talks, or simply failing to complete the acquisition, does not itself create liability: a claim requires conduct contrary to good faith and proof of the resulting loss under the applicable rules. Article 1184 addresses confidential information communicated during negotiations. A separate non-disclosure agreement can make scope, permitted recipients, use, return or destruction of materials and remedies more practical. It should also address information shared with lenders, advisers and potential co-investors.

A general heading that says “non-binding” may sit awkwardly beside mandatory language such as “the parties shall sell and purchase” or “the seller irrevocably agrees”. Article 1279 governs a promise to contract where the required elements of the promised contract are sufficiently identified. A detailed term sheet does not automatically become a promise: its wording, the parties’ intention, the applicable law and their conduct determine which, if any, commitments were undertaken. A duty to negotiate in good faith differs from a promise to conclude the transaction, and both differ from the definitive sale contract. Confidentiality or exclusivity may bind even while the proposed acquisition does not. Counsel should inspect any deposit, break fee or commitment to sign as a possible obligation in its own right.

Draft the boundary directly: identify the paragraphs that bind immediately and state that the contemplated acquisition remains subject to final documentation and any listed approvals. A good-faith negotiation clause should not be used to imply that either party must accept unresolved price, warranty or liability terms. Equally, a non-binding sale proposal does not authorise misleading conduct or misuse of confidential material.

Term-sheet route selector

Select a deal posture to see the first drafting question.

Buyer: preserve conditionality

State what accounts and operating assumptions support the indicative value. Reserve a defined diligence and approval process, and explain whether findings can change price or structure. Avoid wording that fixes an unconditional acquisition obligation before share title, liabilities and approvals have been examined.

How should the proposed deal be described?

Specify the target entity, seller’s interest, acquisition percentage, legal route and any debt or assets treated separately. The same headline percentage can produce very different economic and control outcomes.

For an SRL, social parts are governed by Company Law no. 31/1990. Under Article 202(2), unless the articles of association provide otherwise, a transfer of social parts to a person outside the company requires approval by associates (asociați) representing at least three quarters of the share capital. Article 203 requires entry in the Trade Register and the company’s register of associates; the transfer produces effects against third parties only from its entry in the Trade Register. The timing and effects between buyer and seller depend on the transaction documents and the steps actually completed, while third-party opposability follows the statutory registration rule. Older guides may still describe an opposition and publication procedure removed by Law no. 223/2020; check the current filing route. Read the actual articles before treating a founder’s agreement as sufficient. Other associates may have contractual pre-emption, consent or drag rights that also need checking.

Clarify whether the term sheet describes a purchase of all the shares, a majority stake, a staged acquisition or a capital increase. In a subscription, the money may go into the company; in a purchase of existing interests, the purchase price generally goes to the seller. Combining the two changes dilution, governance and the sources of funds available to grow the business. Any shareholder loan, founder current account, intercompany balance or guarantee should be listed separately rather than assumed to pass with the shares.

For an asset deal, specify which assets, contracts, employees, permits, liabilities and intellectual property are intended to move. Different assignment, consent, employment and tax questions can arise. If the transaction transfers an undertaking, business unit or part of one within the scope of Law no. 67/2006, employment rights and obligations may transfer by operation of law and information and consultation duties may arise; the result depends on what actually moves, not only the deal label. The investment-screening rules can also reach certain acquisitions of tangible or intangible assets in specified sensitive sectors, so an asset structure does not automatically avoid that review. Reclassifying a deal later can make a negotiated price or exclusivity period unworkable. The initial description should be accurate enough to guide due diligence, but can expressly preserve alternative structures pending tax and legal review.

How much of the price mechanism belongs in the term sheet?

Record the basis of the headline value and the main adjustments. A number without a definition of debt, cash, working capital and transaction perimeter does not tell either side what will be paid.

Distinguish enterprise value from equity value. Ask whether the business is sold on a cash-free, debt-free basis, whether a normalised working-capital level is assumed and how financial debt, tax debt, leases, shareholder loans, unpaid dividends and transaction expenses will be treated. If the target has multiple entities, name exactly which interests the price covers and whether real estate, IP or non-core assets stay inside the perimeter.

A locked-box approach normally uses a historic accounts date and protection against value leaving the business before completion. Completion accounts instead adjust the consideration using agreed closing-date metrics. At term-sheet stage, decide which route is intended, what information supports it and what remains to be defined in the SPA. The accounts date, accounting policies, debt and working-capital definitions and dispute mechanism require detailed drafting later.

Where part of the price is an earn-out, specify the performance period, metric and who controls decisions that affect it. A founder seller may expect an additional payment after staying with the target; the buyer may want operational freedom. A vague “up to EUR X based on future results” can move a major disagreement to after closing. Likewise, a deposit, escrow or holdback needs an identified holder, release condition, use and return mechanism. Do not transfer money solely because a short indicative document contains a headline price.

What does the commercial response map show?

Each line in the term sheet should connect to a document, a decision and an owner. Select a row to see the question management should resolve before signature.

Term-sheet negotiation map: convert a headline into a decision
ClauseCommercial questionEvidence to requestDrafting decision
What takes effect on signature?Draft, prior NDA, correspondence, signatory authority.List binding and non-binding clauses expressly.
What is the cash payment and for what perimeter?Accounts, debt schedule, working-capital history.Define value basis and open adjustment items.
How long is the seller off-market?Sale process plan, data-room status, buyer resources.Define duration, scope, milestones and expiry.
What can the buyer inspect and when?Document index, NDA, access permissions.Agree scope, secure access and escalation.
Which condition can delay closing?Articles, sector licences, turnover, investor profile.Screen, allocate filings and set long-stop logic.
What happens if the deal stops?Adviser budget, financing stage, expense schedule.Set cost allocation, expiry and permitted exit.
Legal effectIdentify which exact clauses bind now; do not rely only on the document title or a general non-binding label.

How should exclusivity and confidentiality work?

Exclusivity should be limited in time and scope, tied to an actionable diligence timetable. Confidentiality should control information use and permitted recipients, even if the acquisition never signs.

A seller gives something valuable when it removes the business from the market. Define whether the promise prevents soliciting new offers, continuing existing talks, furnishing information to other bidders or concluding a competing deal. Identify the companies, shareholders and advisers covered, and carve out disclosures required by law or already owed to third parties. A buyer should have enough time for meaningful diligence, financing and approvals, while the seller needs a clear end date and objective progress points.

One workable structure is a short initial period that expires automatically unless the buyer supplies a defined diligence request, completes a management meeting or delivers a draft SPA by agreed dates. These are commercial examples, not default legal deadlines. Extensions should require an affirmative written decision rather than pass unnoticed. A “break fee” is not automatically a penalty clause. Its legal character depends on the trigger, purpose, drafting, relationship to loss and applicable law. Where Romanian law applies and the provision is a penalty clause, Articles 1538 and 1541 of the Civil Code may matter: a court can reduce it under the statutory conditions if the penalty is manifestly excessive compared with the loss the parties could foresee when the contract was made.

For the data room, limit access to identified team members and advisers. Decide whether the buyer may contact employees, customers, banks or suppliers, and whether the parties are competitors. Sensitive pricing and strategy data may require a restricted review team. When employee or customer personal data are involved, the EU General Data Protection Regulation requires the parties to identify their actual roles, purposes and lawful basis, limit access to necessary information and meet applicable transparency and security duties. Use anonymised or aggregated data where it will answer the diligence question; give particular care to payroll, evaluations and health information. Access from outside the EEA may also require a separate international-transfer analysis. An NDA or confidential data room does not replace these obligations.

Which conditions and approvals should be screened before signing?

The term sheet should identify plausible deal-stoppers and allocate who investigates them. A definitive condition can be drafted later, but a promised completion date is unreliable if the parties ignore corporate, tax, competition or investment approvals now.

Start with corporate title, associate or shareholder rights, pledges, financing restrictions, change-of-control clauses and licences. A seller may control a majority economically but still need a corporate resolution or third-party consent. For merger control, check whether the deal is a concentration and whether the relevant turnover and jurisdictional thresholds under Competition Law no. 21/1996 or, where applicable, the EU Merger Regulation are met. Purchase price alone does not establish whether notification is required; a non-notifiable arrangement may still need a separate competition-law review of its clauses or conduct.

Romanian investment screening under Emergency Ordinance no. 46/2022, as amended by Emergency Ordinance no. 17/2026, can cover foreign direct, EU and certain new investments where the statutory definitions and sector conditions are met. Article 3 sets a general value threshold exceeding EUR 5 million, calculated using the prescribed exchange-rate date. An investment at or below that amount may still be examined under the specific security, public-order or EU-interest conditions. Under Article 3(22), certain interdependent operations within one year are treated as one investment and a filing duty arises when their combined value reaches EUR 5 million. The 2026 amendments also cover defined acquisitions of tangible or intangible assets in sensitive sectors. Screen the actual investor, target activity or assets, rights acquired, value, connected transactions and the applicable published procedural rules. The Competition Council’s 2025 investment-screening instructions address valuation, notification and control; their application must be checked against the amended 2026 framework and any subsequent rules. Those instructions envisage a filing after the material deal terms are settled but before implementation, supported by a document evidencing the intended investment. A signed term sheet does not substitute for an authorisation; where clearance is required, do not implement the investment before authorisation. Unauthorised implementation can attract statutory sanctions.

An SRL social-part transfer also needs a registration and tax workstream. The ONRC’s current transfer checklist includes the registration application, corporate resolution, updated articles, identification documents, proof of notifying the central tax authority, a tax attestation certificate and other documents according to the case. Under Article V of Law no. 239/2025, as amended, the seller, buyer or company must notify that authority of the transfer instrument and updated articles within 15 days of the transfer. If the company has the tax debts or budgetary claims specified there, security and proof of the tax authority’s agreement to that security may be needed for registration. ONRC currently says that, until the joint implementing order enters into force, the applicant supplies the tax attestation certificate. This fiscal opposability process is separate from the third-party registration effect under Article 203(2) of Company Law. Check the live ONRC list and tax procedure before filing. Existing shareholder-change guidance covers the procedural stage; a separate SPA guide explains definitive closing conditions. In the term sheet, assign responsibility for the tax notice, certificate, any security and registry filing, and set a realistic sequence and long-stop mechanism.

What should the buyer investigate during the exclusivity period?

Diligence should test assumptions that could change price, structure, closing conditions or the decision to proceed. A long list of documents is useful only when findings feed back into the deal.

Start with a prioritised request list: corporate records and shareholder title; recent accounts and debt; material customer and supplier contracts; security and guarantees; tax filings and disputes; permits; employment and key-person arrangements; property and leases; intellectual property; technology and data processing. Sector-specific issues can take priority. For a licensed operator, regulatory continuity may matter more than a minor contract warranty. For a software target, source-code ownership and contractor assignments may be central.

Do not make all diligence an undefined subjective escape route. A buyer can reserve a satisfactory-review condition, but the parties should understand whether the indicative value assumes no material undisclosed debt, no loss of a major contract and a defined financial baseline. Where there is a known issue, record whether it must be fixed, priced, insured, specifically indemnified or expressly accepted. The SPA can carry the final mechanism once evidence is available.

Data-room access should have a clear beginning and end. Preserve document versions and a Q&A log, distinguish information supplied by the target from informal remarks, and give both teams a controlled channel for new disclosures. This reduces disputes about what was shown and when. For a cross-border buyer, agree translation priorities early so the limited review time is spent on material Romanian documents rather than a last-minute full archive.

How do governing law, costs and the timetable fit together?

Choose the law and dispute mechanism for binding term-sheet clauses, allocate exploratory costs and distinguish target dates from enforceable obligations. The term sheet and definitive SPA can have different governing-law choices, but their interaction must be clear.

Cross-border parties often reuse an overseas template. This can create uncertainty if the binding provisions name one law, the later SPA is expected to use another and Romanian corporate steps cannot be displaced by either choice. Specify which court or agreed dispute forum addresses exclusivity or confidentiality disputes, and check the formal validity of the clause. A proposal to arbitrate should be assessed alongside interim protection for sensitive information.

Ordinarily each side pays its own advisers unless the parties agree otherwise. If one party asks for reimbursement, a deposit or a break payment, identify the trigger, calculation, cap, exclusions and relationship with proven loss. Avoid an undefined undertaking to cover “all transaction costs” merely because negotiations fail. Legal diligence, financial diligence, translation and any regulatory filing should be costed early, even if precise fees are not yet known.

A practical timetable uses milestones for data-room opening, diligence questions, first SPA draft, approvals analysis and target signing, with a separate expectation for closing. It names the party responsible for each step. “Completion within 30 days” may be commercially attractive but unworkable where investment screening, merger clearance, consents or seller remediation are required. A long-stop date belongs in the final contractual framework once the conditions are understood.

What are the most common negotiation errors?

A fixed price without a defined perimeter

The buyer assumes debt is deducted; the seller assumes the quoted sum is paid in full. Define the valuation basis and treatment of cash, debt, working capital and shareholder balances before the number becomes a public or board commitment.

An open-ended exclusivity promise

The seller stops talking to others while the buyer has no dated obligation to investigate, draft or seek approval. Tie exclusivity to a fixed expiry, scope and progress milestones.

Non-binding language that contradicts the operative clauses

The label says “indicative”, while later paragraphs use language of a concluded sale or promise. State the binding carve-outs expressly and review the entire document for inconsistent commitments.

Risk: A rushed term sheet can consume negotiating leverage without moving the deal toward an executable SPA. The contract’s name, an expected timetable and an indicative value cannot cure a missing corporate consent or a prohibited early implementation of a regulated acquisition.

What should management send for a first legal review?

A short, organised starter file is enough to identify the first red flags. Use the checklist to track what the team has assembled; it does not transmit information or give an automated legal opinion.

Select each document group as it becomes available. The count updates locally.

0 of 8 items selectedChoose a document group to start the review file.

What can Atrium’s focused term-sheet review deliver?

A useful first review turns the draft into a decision list: clauses that bind now, issues that require evidence and terms that should stay open until the SPA. The deliverables and fee should be defined for the proposed matter.

Depending on the mandate, Atrium can review the identity and authority of the signatories, mark up the binding and non-binding division, sharpen price assumptions and exclusivity, identify the diligence priorities and flag Romanian corporate or regulatory dependencies. Management can then decide which commercial concessions are acceptable before the document goes back to the other side. This early work can be followed by a separately scoped due diligence exercise and SPA negotiation if the parties proceed.

For a company making repeated acquisitions or running multiple Romanian contracts, ongoing legal support may help maintain a consistent approach to NDAs, board approvals, local filings and recurring commercial documents. A monthly arrangement should state what work is covered and what separate transaction or dispute work needs a distinct mandate. The immediate decision for a single deal remains whether the proposed term sheet should be signed in its current form.

Related Guides

Frequently asked questions

Is a term sheet legally binding in Romania?

Its effect depends on wording, applicable law and the transaction context. Parties often intend the proposed sale and price to be non-binding while making confidentiality, exclusivity, cost or dispute clauses binding. A term sheet that resembles a sufficiently definite promise to contract needs particular care under Article 1279 of the Romanian Civil Code. Have counsel assess the whole document, not its title alone.

Can we agree a price before due diligence?

Yes, as an indicative value linked to stated assumptions. Record the acquisition perimeter, accounts basis, treatment of cash, debt and working capital, and the right to revisit structure or price if material findings emerge. The final price formula and dispute procedure belong in the definitive agreement.

How long should exclusivity last?

There is no single statutory period for a private acquisition term sheet. The period should match the realistic time for access, diligence, financing, drafting and necessary approvals. Set a clear start, expiry, scope and any extension mechanism. A seller should also consider whether progress milestones are needed during the no-shop period.

Does a foreign buyer need approval before signing a term sheet?

Signing an indicative document is a different question from implementing an acquisition. The parties should nevertheless screen investment, merger and sector-specific approval requirements before promising a signing or closing date. Any binding pre-closing control rights or operational directions need separate scrutiny. The applicable rules depend on investor identity, target activity, transaction structure and value.

What happens if one party walks away?

The answer turns on binding clauses, conduct during negotiations and applicable law. Romanian law permits parties to end negotiations, but requires good faith and protects confidential information. An exclusivity breach, an agreed cost provision or an enforceable promise may create a different exposure. Do not assume that failure to sign an SPA always gives rise to a break fee or that it can never lead to a claim.

Make the next signature a deliberate decision

Send the draft term sheet and a short note on the target, proposed stake, valuation basis and signature deadline. Atrium can discuss a focused Romanian-law review before you agree exclusivity or launch the data room. If your company needs recurring corporate and contract support, a monthly arrangement can be discussed separately.

Disclaimer: This page provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice, a legal opinion or the creation of a lawyer-client relationship. Legal solutions depend on the specific facts and documents involved.

AI Notice: AI-assisted content.