In brief
- The State is paying a further 1,672,053.47 lei for four plots taken in 2019 for the expansion of the Henri Coandă International Airport. The money comes from the state budget, through the budget of the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, and covers entries 238, 306, 624 and 635 in Annex no. 2 to Government Decision no. 799/2019, that is 28,100 square metres in Otopeni and Tunari, Ilfov County.
- The sum comes from four court cases the State lost, not from a revaluation by the administration. For the four entries, the 2019 annex provided 1,252,647.23 lei in total. After the judgments became final at the Bucharest Court of Appeal, they reach 2,924,700.70 lei, that is 2.33 times more.
- This is the second decision with exactly the same title published in the same issue of the Official Gazette of Romania. Government Decision no. 745/2026, at pages 4-5, amends other entries, 11 and 459, on the basis of other court cases, and supplements by 1,620,859.60 lei. The two differ only in their number, their case files and their figures.
Published: Official Gazette of Romania (Monitorul Oficial), Part I, no. 805 of 23 September 2026
In force from: 23 September 2026, the date of publication, because the act does not set a later date
Government Decision no. 747/2026, published on 23 September 2026, adds 1,672,053.47 lei to the compensation approved almost seven years ago for the land taken for the expansion of the Henri Coandă International Airport. The mechanism is the one we see more and more often in the Official Gazette of Romania: the owner challenges in court the sum set by the expropriating authority, wins, and the Government comes later with extra money, exactly as when the State paid a further 65,560 lei for eight plots in Gorj, also following court judgments. The difference is one of scale: there it was a matter of tens of thousands of lei, here of almost 1.7 million for four plots.
The act has four articles and one annex. Article I approves the supplement and shows where the money comes from: chapter 84.01 „Transporturi”, title 55 „Alte transferuri”, budget article 55.01 „Transferuri interne”, item 55.01.12 „Investiții ale agenților economici cu capital de stat”, from the budget of the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, under the state budget law for 2026 no. 43/2026. Article II amends entries 238, 306, 624 and 635 in Annex no. 2 to Government Decision no. 799/2019, published in Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 899 of 7 November 2019. Article III says how the money moves, and Article IV places responsibility for the data in the annex with the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, through the National Company „Aeroporturi București” S.A.
The legal basis invoked is Article 108 of the Constitution of Romania, republished, together with Article 8(3), Article 9(8) and Article 32(3) and (4) of Law no. 255/2010 on expropriation for a cause of public utility. The first text allows the individual sums to be supplemented by government decision, at the request of the expropriating authority, in duly justified situations. The other three require the list of owners and properties to be updated and corrected whenever necessary, so that the legal position matches the situation on the ground. Being a government decision, the act enters into force on the very date of publication, because no later date appears in its text.
Four court judgments underpin the payment, all of them final at the Bucharest Court of Appeal: civil judgment no. 963/F of 13 May 2024, final through civil decision no. 189A of 25 February 2025, in case no. 189/93/2022; civil judgment no. 2.054/F of 14 October 2024, final through civil decision no. 489A of 30 May 2025, in case no. 3.001/93/2022; civil judgment no. 2.057/F of the same day, final through civil decision no. 654A of 20 June 2025, in case no. 3.004/93/2022; and civil judgment no. 1.544/F of 28 May 2025, final through civil decision no. 170A of 9 February 2026, in case no. 1.663/93/2021.
What it changes in practice
The first effect is the money itself. The 1,672,053.47 lei are transferred by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure into a treasury account opened in the name of the National Company „Aeroporturi București” S.A., within at most 30 days of the date on which the request to open appropriations is approved. The deadline runs from a moment that depends on the administration, not from publication, so the actual date of the transfer cannot be read from the act.
The second effect shows in Annex no. 2 to Government Decision no. 799/2019, which is the official list of those expropriated. Four of its lines are replaced. Entry 238, Tunari, 16,700 square metres of arable land within the built-up area, owner Simion Tudor, moves from 675,122.15 lei to 1,369,930 lei. Entry 306, also Tunari, 5,400 square metres, moves from 218,302.97 lei to 912,000 lei, and there the holders change as well: in place of the names from 2019 appear Niculae Jan and Spiță Stamate. Entries 624 and 635, both in Otopeni and both in the names of Aldea Ion Cristian and Ștefania Aldea, move from 239,481.41 lei to 428,523 lei for 4,000 square metres, and from 119,740.70 lei to 214,247.70 lei for 2,000 square metres respectively.
The third effect is one of identification, not of money. For entry 306, the annex changes the persons recorded in the list. That matters beyond the sum paid: whoever does not appear in the annex cannot claim payment under the procedure in Law no. 255/2010, because the claim for compensation is filed by the holder of the real right, with supporting documents. Correcting the list is precisely what Article 32(3) and (4) of the law requires.
The fourth effect is budgetary and the easiest to overlook. The money comes from the ministry’s own budget, from an investment item, not from a reserve fund. A sum allocated in that way does not appear out of nowhere: it is taken from what was planned elsewhere under the same item, and the act does not say from where.
The fifth effect concerns responsibility. Article IV places on the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, through the National Company „Aeroporturi București” S.A., the responsibility for the accuracy of the data in the annex and for the correctness of the documents underlying them. It is the same company whose 2019 valuation was overturned in court in all four cases.
What has changed compared with the previous situation
The substantive change is the price. Compared line by line with the annex published in Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 899 of 7 November 2019, the four entries came to 1,252,647.23 lei and now come to 2,924,700.70 lei. The increase is 133.48 per cent, that is 2.33 times.
The increase is not the same everywhere, though. Entry 306 rises 4.18 times, entry 238 rises 2.03 times, and entries 624 and 635 rise 1.79 times each. Set against area, the figures say more than the percentages. In 2019, the expropriating authority used a single price per locality: 40.4265 lei per square metre at Tunari and 59.8704 lei per square metre at Otopeni, identical for every plot, whatever its position. After the court cases, the Otopeni entries reach 107.13 lei per square metre, while those at Tunari reach 82.03 lei per square metre for entry 238 and 168.89 lei per square metre for entry 306. The same commune, the same land use category, the same status within the built-up area, but a ratio of 2.06 between two neighbours.
The second change is the name on the list. At entry 306, the 2019 annex recorded Pene C. Elena and Nicolae C. Sofia. Now Niculae Jan and Spiță Stamate appear. At the other three entries, the owners and the cadastral details stay exactly as in 2019, even though Article II announces „actualizarea elementelor de identificare a imobilelor, a titularilor de drepturi reale și a sumelor”, the updating of the identification details of the properties, of the holders of real rights and of the sums. In practice, at three entries out of four only the last column changes.
The third change is one of context, not of text. On the same day and in the same issue of the Official Gazette of Romania, at pages 4-5, comes Government Decision no. 745/2026, with an identical title word for word. That one amends entries 11 and 459, starts from civil judgment no. 1.656/F of 13 June 2025 and from civil judgment no. 89 of 17 January 2025, and supplements by 1,620,859.60 lei: entry 11, at Otopeni, rises from 552,937.97 lei to 977,085.60 lei, and entry 459, at Tunari, from 870,179.90 lei to 2,066,852 lei. They are not two versions of the same act, and neither replaces the other. They are two separate decisions, touching different entries of the same annex and entering into force on the same day.
Put end to end, Wednesday’s two decisions add 3,292,913.07 lei to the compensation for a single project. The 2019 annex covered 681 entries, 5,692,635 square metres and 358,211,539 lei, at a rate of 4.6628 lei to the euro, that is around 76.8 million euro. The supplement of 23 September 2026 amounts to 0.92 per cent of the original sum and concerns six of the 681 entries.
Advantages and disadvantages
What it improves
- Four families and one owner of agricultural land receive the money set by the courts, and the sums appear in the Official Gazette of Romania, so they can be checked by anyone, not only by the parties to the case.
- The official list of those expropriated is brought up to date. At entry 306, the holders of the real right change, which unblocks payment to the persons entitled to it.
- The act says exactly where the money comes from, down to the budget item, and sets a deadline of 30 days for the transfer of the sum to the National Company „Aeroporturi București” S.A.
- The sum in Article I can be checked by calculation: the differences between the new values and those of 2019 come to exactly 1,672,053.47 lei, with no rounding and no remainder.
- All four court judgments are fully identified, with number, date, court and case number, so they can be looked up in the courts portal.
What remains a problem
- Between the first judgment becoming final, on 25 February 2025, and the adoption of this government decision, on 18 September 2026, 570 days went by. For the other cases, 476, 455 and 221 days.
- The act gives only the final value in the annex, without saying what sum the court awarded for each entry. The gap between what the judge decided and what ends up on the list cannot be checked from the Official Gazette of Romania.
- The 30 day deadline runs from the approval of the request to open appropriations, that is from a moment the act neither dates nor limits in time.
- Two decisions with identical titles, published in the same issue a page apart, differ only in their number. Anyone searching by title finds two identical results.
- Annex no. 2 to Government Decision no. 799/2019 has been amended piece by piece since 2019, and no consolidated version is published anywhere. To find the current compensation for an entry, you have to follow every amending decision.
- The single price per locality used in 2019 stays unchanged for the other entries, even though the courts set it aside in both communes.
Practical advice
- Check your entry in Annex no. 2 to Government Decision no. 799/2019, published in Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 899 of 7 November 2019. The current number there is the key by which every later amendment is made, including this one.
- If you appear at entry 238, 306, 624 or 635, the sum in the compensation column is now the one in the decision of 23 September 2026, not the one from 2019. Compare it with the operative part of the judgment in your own case.
- The money does not reach the owner automatically. It is first transferred into a treasury account in the name of the National Company „Aeroporturi București” S.A., and payment to you follows the procedure in Law no. 255/2010, on the basis of a claim and supporting documents.
- If you won your case, talk to a lawyer about interest for the period after the judgment became final. Decision no. 31/2020 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 539 of 23 June 2020, holds that default interest is not due for the interval between the transfer of ownership and the close of the proceedings, but is due for the period after that.
- If you are preparing to challenge the amount of the compensation, bear in mind that Article 22(6) of Law no. 255/2010 requires the expert and the court to refer to the valuations of the chambers of notaries public as at the moment of the transfer of ownership. The useful documents are those from the year of the expropriation, not today’s prices.
- A challenge does not keep your land. Article 22(1) of the same law states plainly that exercising the available remedies does not suspend the transfer of ownership, so the case is fought over money alone.
- If the name in the annex no longer matches the current owner, ask the expropriating authority to correct the list. Article 32(3) and (4) of Law no. 255/2010 requires correction whenever the legal position does not match the situation on the ground, and entry 306 shows that it can be done.
Frequently asked questions
When does the decision apply from?
Who receives the 1,672,053.47 lei?
Why are there two decisions with the same title on the same day?
By how much has the compensation risen since 2019?
When does the money reach the owners?
Why does a court set the compensation and not the expropriating authority?
What happens to the other entries in the annex?
Where can I read the amended annex?
Editorial analysis
As a text, the decision is clean. The four differences between the new values and those of 2019 give exactly the sum in Article I, with no remainder and no rounding, the legal basis is correctly chosen, and the court judgments are identified with number, date, court and case file. We found in it no inconsistency with legal consequences. The problem lies not in the act, but in what the act reveals about the procedure it comes from.
The first observation emerges only from dividing the sums by the areas. In the 2019 annex, the expropriating authority did not value the plots, it valued the localities: every square metre in Tunari received 40.4265 lei and every square metre in Otopeni 59.8704 lei, to the decimal, regardless of location, access or neighbours. At entry 306, for instance, 5,400 square metres were valued at 218,302.97 lei, that is at exactly the same unit price as the 16,700 square metre plot at entry 238. The courts took that uniformity apart: after the cases, entry 238 reaches 82.03 lei per square metre and entry 306 reaches 168.89 lei per square metre. The same commune, the same land use category, the same status within the built-up area, but a ratio of two to one between two owners to whom the administration had given, in 2019, the same figure. The difference existed all along, and the single price per commune hid it.
The second observation concerns the clock. Article 22(1) of Law no. 255/2010 provides that exercising the available remedies does not suspend the transfer of ownership. The people at these four entries have not had their land since 2019. The judgments became final on 25 February 2025, 30 May 2025, 20 June 2025 and 9 February 2026, and the Government adopted the act on 18 September 2026, that is 570, 476, 455 and 221 days later. Here comes a calculation the act does not make. Decision no. 31/2020 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, delivered on a referral for a preliminary ruling on a point of law, holds that default interest is not due for the interval between the transfer of ownership and the close of the proceedings, but is due for the period after that. In other words, every day that passes between a judgment becoming final and payment creates a separate claim against the State. The 570 days in the first case are therefore interest running, which will have to be paid from public money too, through a second set of proceedings.
The third observation puts the figures in context. The 2019 annex had 681 entries and 358,211,539 lei. The two decisions published on 23 September 2026 touch six of them and add 3,292,913.07 lei, that is 0.92 per cent of the original sum. Litigation thus looks cheap, but the percentage is due to the small number of cases, not to the size of the corrections. If the ratio obtained at these four entries, 2.33 to one, were repeated across the whole list, the 358.2 million lei approved in 2019 would come to around 836 million. That is not a forecast, because most owners did not sue and will not. It is the measure of the risk carried by a valuation made at the level of a locality, and the explanation for why these decisions are now coming in a series.
The fourth observation is about the form of publication. Two decisions with titles identical word for word, adopted on the same day and published in the same issue a page apart, differ in nothing but their number. In the contents of the issue, the entries for numbers 745 and 747 are two identical blocks of text. Nothing in the title says which of them concerns entries 11 and 459 and which entries 238, 306, 624 and 635. On top of that, Annex no. 2 to Government Decision no. 799/2019 has been amended piece by piece for seven years, without a consolidated version ever being published. Anyone who wants to find out today what the compensation for an entry is has to add up, in order, every decision that has touched it.
What should be changed
- The annex should also show the sum set by the court, not only the final value. One extra column, showing the sum in the operative part of the judgment and the case number on that line, would make the link between the proceedings and the figure paid verifiable. As things stand, the correspondence between the four cases and the four entries can only be guessed at.
- Law no. 255/2010 needs a deadline for the expropriating authority. A period of 30 days from the communication of a final judgment for submitting the request for a supplement would replace the intervals of 455 to 570 days in this act and would stop the build up of default interest that the State will pay in any case, but through a second set of proceedings.
- The single price per locality should be abandoned at the initial valuation. If, in the same commune and for the same land use category, courts arrive at 82 and at 169 lei per square metre, the valuation that gave both of them 40.43 lei was a wrong method, not an acceptable approximation. Its cost is showing only now, split into decisions of a million and a half each.
- Annex no. 2 to Government Decision no. 799/2019 should be republished in consolidated form. Article 70(1) of Law no. 24/2000 on legislative drafting rules provides that an act substantially amended is republished on the basis of a provision contained in the amending act itself, and paragraph (3) gives a deadline of 45 days for that. Such a provision could be written into a decision like this one, with a single extra article. A list of 681 entries, with sums changed year after year by separate decisions, is exactly the case the rule exists for.
- Two acts with the same subject matter adopted on the same day should carry titles that tell them apart. Mentioning the amended entries in the title of the decision itself, as is done with other correcting acts, would solve the problem at no cost and would spare the reader the job of comparing two identical texts.
Original text of the legal act
The text below is reproduced in Romanian, the official form of publication.
The full text, as published in the Official Gazette of Romania
Official Gazette of Romania no. 805 of 23 September 2026 16 pages PDF, 104 KB the act starts on page 5
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.