Romania’s road authority says it has not lost its claim to 43 million lei in delay penalties against the contractor building lot 2 of the A7 motorway. The payment is suspended until arbitration decides the underlying dispute, after the Bucharest Court of Appeal rejected CNAIR’s challenge to an interim arbitral measure.
What the court ruling did — and did not — decide
CNAIR said the Bucharest Court of Appeal’s decision on 16 October 2026 did not cancel the penalties, reduce their value or establish that the works were completed on time. The ruling, which is not final, rejected the authority’s action seeking annulment of an arbitral measure. That measure temporarily suspended the effects of the contract supervisor’s decision until the arbitration is concluded. CNAIR says the underlying entitlement to penalties has not yet been examined by either a court or an arbitral tribunal. The contractor has therefore not won the dispute on its merits, and the authority’s claim remains contested rather than confirmed.
The contract dispute is still in arbitration
According to CNAIR, the contract supervisor determined that the authority was entitled to 43 million lei in delay penalties for the Mizil–Pietroasele section, lot 2 of the Ploiești–Buzău A7 motorway. The Bulgarian contractor, the Trace Group Hold–Coni association, challenged that determination in arbitration. While that procedure continues, the contractor sought a provisional measure to suspend the decision’s effects. The arbitral tribunal granted the request in an order dated 25 March 2026. As a result, payment is postponed, but the order does not decide whether the penalties are ultimately owed. That question remains for the arbitration on the substance of the claim.
Why the procedure matters for public contracts
The case illustrates the separation between interim relief and the merits of a public contract dispute. An arbitral tribunal can temporarily preserve the position of a party while it examines the main claim; CNAIR compared the measure to a presidential order, which suspends an act until the substance is heard. A challenge seeking annulment does not normally reopen the technical and contractual evidence. CNAIR said the Bucharest court’s review was limited and that it will analyse the reasoning before deciding whether to appeal within the legal deadline. The authority also said it will continue arguing in arbitration that the contractual deadline was missed and the penalties are due.
| Fact | Details |
|---|---|
| Project | Lot 2, Mizil–Pietroasele, on the A7 Ploiești–Buzău motorway |
| Claimed penalties | 43 million lei |
| Contractor | Trace Group Hold–Coni association |
| Interim measure | Payment suspended until the arbitration is concluded |
| Arbitral order | 25 March 2026 |
| Court decision | Bucharest Court of Appeal, 16 October 2026 |
The payment is postponed, but the order does not decide whether the penalties are ultimately owed.
WHY IT MATTERS
For public buyers and contractors, an interim suspension is not a ruling on entitlement. It can pause enforcement while arbitration examines delay, contract obligations and the evidence, while a court reviewing annulment may have only a limited role rather than reconsidering the dispute from the beginning.
Reported from economedia.ro, 2026-10-17. The Tender Wire is published by Otnox.
