In brief

  • The Constitutional Court rejected the plea of unconstitutionality raised against art. 7, art. 8 para. (1), (2) and (3) and art. 9 of the old version of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008 on civil legal aid.
  • In practice, nothing changes for people applying for legal aid today: the texts examined are those in force before the amendments introduced by Legea nr. 31/2023 and Legea nr. 268/2024, already replaced by the current form of the law.
  • The decision is final and generally binding, so it definitively closes constitutional challenges on these texts for old cases still pending.
Act: Decision of the Constitutional Court no. 761/2025
Published: Official Gazette of Romania no. 646 of 5 August 2026
Ruled: 11 December 2025

The Constitutional Court has rejected the challenge brought against the rules of the old civil legal aid law, the mechanism through which the state pays or advances court costs for people without sufficient income. Decizia nr. 761/2025, published in the Official Gazette of Romania (Monitorul Oficial) nearly eight months after it was issued, is the second Constitutional Court decision on access to justice published recently, after the decision on the 15-day enforcement appeal deadline.

The case originated in a request for legal aid rejected in 2019 by the Râmnicu Vâlcea Court. The author of the plea argued that the income thresholds set by law (300 lei per family member for full aid, 600 lei for 50% aid) had not been updated between 2008 and 2019, even though the minimum wage had risen significantly during that period, and that the scope of expenses covered by the maximum aid (the equivalent of 10 gross minimum wages) was too narrow. The Court rejected the criticisms, some as unsubstantiated, others on the merits, holding that setting the thresholds and eligibility criteria is a matter for the legislature to decide, not a constitutional issue.

The same thresholds of 300 and 600 lei reached the CCR again, this time in the current wording of the ordinance, and the Court upheld these as constitutional too.

What it changes in practice

For people applying for legal aid today, the decision changes nothing in practice: the texts examined by the Constitutional Court are those in the old wording of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008, already replaced by Legea nr. 31/2023 and, for art. 8 para. (3), by Legea nr. 268/2024. The real effect is different: it definitively closes an avenue of constitutional challenge for old cases still pending, where courts apply the earlier form of the law, and judges will be able to reject similar pleas directly, without a new referral to the Constitutional Court.

For the case that triggered the referral, the decision is communicated to the Râmnicu Vâlcea Court, which will issue a final judgment, based on the law validated by the Constitutional Court, on the request to review the refusal of legal aid.

What has changed compared with the previous situation

  • Nothing in the text: art. 7-9 of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008, in the wording examined by the Constitutional Court, are already superseded by the amendments introduced by Legea nr. 31/2023 and Legea nr. 268/2024; the current form of the law is not affected by this decision.
  • An avenue of challenge is closed: arguments concerning the outdated thresholds and the wording considered unclear can no longer be raised as a plea of unconstitutionality in cases governed by the old form of the law.
  • Case law confirmed: the Court reaffirms, citing Decizia nr. 592/2024 and Decizia nr. 517/2022, that setting income thresholds and eligibility criteria for legal aid is a matter for the legislature to decide, not a constitutional issue.

Advantages and disadvantages

What it improves

  • Predictability: courts no longer need to examine on the merits arguments already settled by the Constitutional Court, so old cases can be resolved faster.
  • It confirms that the state may set income thresholds for access to legal aid, as long as the criteria exist and are applied uniformly to all applicants.

What remains a problem

  • People with old cases, governed by the earlier form of the law, gain no improvement in the conditions for receiving aid, even though the argument about outdated thresholds had a real basis (the rise in the minimum wage between 2008 and 2019).
  • The decision says nothing about the thresholds in force today; anyone looking for the current amounts must consult the updated version of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008, not the figures in this decision.

Practical advice

  1. Do not use the thresholds from this decision as a current reference: the 300 and 600 lei per family member are historical figures, from the form of the law before 2023; always check the updated version of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008.
  2. If your legal aid request was rejected: the request for review is filed with the court that rejected it, within the deadline set by law, and is unrelated to this decision.
  3. If you have an old case, from before 2023, where these thresholds are discussed: the Constitutional Court’s decision definitively closes the unconstitutionality argument; focus on the other admissible grounds of your request.
  4. For large court costs: consult a lawyer to check whether you qualify for any of the current forms of legal aid (exemption, reduction, staggering or postponement of fees, payment of the lawyer or expert), under the law currently in force.

Frequently asked questions

What did the Constitutional Court decide?
It rejected, as inadmissible, the plea concerning art. 7 of the old version of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008, and, as unsubstantiated, the plea concerning art. 8 para. (1), (2) and (3) and art. 9. All the texts examined were declared constitutional.
Why did the Constitutional Court examine an old version of the law, if it had since been amended?
Because the case that triggered the referral dates from 2019-2020, and the Court examines the effects of the law that continues to apply to pending cases, even though the text was later amended by Legea nr. 31/2023 and Legea nr. 268/2024.
Do the income thresholds for legal aid change?
No. The decision does not change anything in the law; the thresholds in force today are those in the updated version of Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008, not the 300 and 600 lei figures discussed in the decision.
Can the old form of the law still be challenged on constitutional grounds, with the same arguments?
No. The decision is final and generally binding, so courts will directly reject similar pleas without a new review on the merits.
Where can I find the current rules on legal aid?
In Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008, as subsequently amended by Legea nr. 31/2023 and Legea nr. 268/2024, available on the Ministry of Justice’s legislative portal.

The same logic, not interfering with the legislature’s choices on additional salary rights, appears in the decision in which the Constitutional Court upheld the 2022 salary condition for the risk allowance of veterinary health workers.

Original text of the legal act

The text below is reproduced in Romanian, its official form of publication in the Official Gazette.

The full text, as published in the Official Gazette of Romania

Official Gazette of Romania no. 646 of 5 August 2026 16 pages PDF, 364 KB the act starts on page 2

Open the official PDFDownload the PDF

The viewer is not shown on small screens. Use the buttons above to open or download the file.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific situations, consult a licensed attorney or tax advisor.