Trial at Mureș County Court
In this matter, the claimants requested the court to annul the decision issued by the National Commission for Real Estate Compensation (CNCI) that had rejected their request for compensation measures related to a land parcel of 8,100 sqm now located within Târgu Mureș city limits. They challenged the legality of that decision and sought validation of the proposal made by the Mureș County Commission (year 2001) and allocation of the corresponding number of compensation points, based on Law no. 165/2013.
At Mureș Court, the claimants argued they are the legal heirs of the dispossessed owner, filed their restoration request within the legal deadline, and possessed all supporting documentation—including ownership titles and heirs’ certificates. They also emphasized the land could no longer be physically restituted, as it had already been restored to others; thus, compensation via points remained the only viable remedy.
The CNCI defended its invalidating decision by contending the restoration request was submitted by a deceased individual, rendering it null. However, the court found this to be unfounded: the restoration request was submitted by the heirs, acting in their own capacity as permitted by law. The court also noted that none of the involved authorities had contested the existence of the property right.
Regarding compensation methodology and valuation, the court held that, as the property could not be returned in kind, compensation in points was appropriate. They applied the 2021 notarial grid (deemed relevant given the date of the CNCI decision) with a corrective multiplier of 0.75 for intravilan arable land, yielding a figure of 187.5 lei per sqm. The total compensation calculated was approximately 1,500,000 lei in compensation points. Consequently, the court annulled the CNCI decision and ordered the Commission to issue a new decision that validates the Mureș County Commission’s proposal and awards each claimant 50% of the total points.
Trial at Târgu Mureș Court of Appeal
Both the claimants and CNCI appealed. CNCI reiterated its nullity argument, which the appeals court rejected, agreeing with the lower court’s assessment of the restoration request’s validity.
The claimants, on the other hand, argued that the awarded compensation was insufficient. They claimed the court should have applied the 2022 notarial grid (which would yield a higher value) and recognized the land’s current designation as “yards and constructions” based on present cadastral and planning documents. They sought recalculation of compensation using the 2022 grid and removal of the 0.75 reduction coefficient—claiming this would result in a markedly higher allocation of points.
Determining the Relevant Year for the Notarial Grid
The Court of Appeal confirmed the claimants’ right to compensation and the legality of their request. The court deemed their criticisms valid based on binding decisions from Romania’s highest court (Decisions no. 48/2023, 9/2022, and 57/2022), which clarified that Article 21(6) of Law 165/2013 mandates land appraisal using the notarial grid from the year prior to the CNCI’s decision—but only when the contested decision affirms compensation.
When the CNCI issues a restoration refusal or invalidates the file, compensation must instead be calculated judicially under Article 35(2) of the law. Accordingly, using the 2022 notarial grid, compensation was recalculated to approximately 1,750,000 points—an increase of over 16%, aligning with rising property values in the reference area.
Application of the Reduction Percentage Based on the Land’s Usage Category at Acquisition
Regarding the 75% reduction coefficient, the court agreed with the lower court that this remains valid. Compensation must reflect the land’s technical characteristics and its usage category at the time of acquisition—which in this case was agricultural arable land. Thus, the current classification as “yards and constructions” (as per modern records) is legally irrelevant when calculating compensation.