Commercial and Employment Law · 2 min read · 2026-08
Damages claimed in Romania against a Hungarian company: is it enough that the loss occurred in Romania?
In cross-border contractual disputes, a loss occurring in Romania does not automatically give Romanian courts jurisdiction. The contract's nature decides.
Context
In commercial disputes with an international element, it is not unusual for one party to try to gain a procedural advantage by choosing the court it considers more favourable.
A recent ruling in a dispute between a Romanian company and a Hungarian company highlights the importance of correctly characterising the legal relationship between the parties and of the EU rules on court jurisdiction.
The facts
The claimant company sought to hold its contractual partner liable for damages and argued that the Romanian courts had jurisdiction, on the basis that the loss had occurred in Romania.
At first sight, the argument may seem persuasive. However, the existence of an alleged loss is not always sufficient to establish the jurisdiction of the courts of the place where it occurs.
What the courts examined
The key issue was determining the legal nature of the claims raised.
The courts found that a contractual relationship existed between the parties, and that the claimant's claims originated in the performance of obligations assumed under the contract. In these circumstances, jurisdiction could not be assessed solely by reference to the place where the claimant alleged it had suffered a loss, but had to be established under the rules applicable to contractual disputes.
In other words, merely framing a claim as one for damages does not automatically turn a contractual dispute into a tortious one, and does not allow the choice of court to be based solely on where one party claims to have borne the economic consequences of the alleged non-performance.
The ruling
After examining the legal relationship between the parties and the provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, the courts concluded that the Romanian courts did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.
Why this ruling matters
In international commercial contracts, a court's jurisdiction does not always depend on where one party claims to have suffered a loss. The legal nature of the relationship between the parties and the actual basis of the claims raised can play a decisive role in establishing the competent court.
For this reason, before starting cross-border litigation, it is advisable to carefully review the contract, the obligations assumed by the parties, and the applicable EU rules.