Decree 92 of 19 April 1950 nationalised residential buildings without compensation. Many cases about old houses in Bucharest start with it.
In 1949 the regime decided to collectivise agriculture, and in 1962 it announced the process complete. That is where farmland restitution claims come from.
Law 10/2001 covers property taken between 6 March 1945 and 22 December 1989. Restitution notices under it were filed until 14 February 2002.
On 12 October 2010, in Maria Atanasiu, the European Court found the ineffectiveness of the restitution mechanism to be a recurrent and large-scale problem.
Law 165/2013, of May 2013: restitution in kind where possible, and compensation in points through the restitution authority (ANRP) where not.
Nationalisation and restitution: the short answer
Between 1945 and 1989 Romania's communist regime took houses, land and businesses. The 1945 land reform expropriated large estates, collectivisation between 1949 and 1962 moved almost all farmland into collective farms and state ownership, and Decree 92 of April 1950 nationalised houses and residential buildings without compensation. After the 1989 revolution Romania began giving property back: Law 18/1991 for farmland, Law 10/2001 for property taken between 6 March 1945 and 22 December 1989, and Law 165/2013, meant to finish the process.
The problem is that decades passed between nationalisation and restitution. In the meantime the state sold flats to tenants and local authorities handed out land. Sometimes the same property has two people with a legitimate claim. That is why, even in 2026, a restitution check is part of checking an older property or a plot of land.
Put simply: in most deals this will not be a problem. But where it is, it is the only problem that matters, and you check it before the money, not after.
The timeline: from nationalisation to restitution
| When | What happened | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 6 March 1945 | Start of the period covered by Law 10/2001 | Law 10/2001 (Romanian) |
| 23 March 1945 | Law 187/1945, the land reform: expropriation of farm estates over 50 hectares | Law 187/1945 (Romanian) |
| March 1949 | The party decides to collectivise agriculture on the Soviet model | Adevărul (Romanian) |
| 19 to 20 April 1950 | Decree 92/1950 nationalises residential buildings, without compensation | Decree 92/1950 (Romanian) |
| April 1962 | The regime announces that collectivisation is complete | Descoperă (Romanian) |
| 22 December 1989 | Fall of the regime. End of the period covered by Law 10/2001 | Law 10/2001 (Romanian) |
| 19 February 1991 | Law 18/1991, the Land Resources Law: restitution of farmland | Law 18/1991 (Romanian) |
| 25 November 1995 | Law 112/1995: limited restitution of nationalised flats, and a right for tenants to buy the flats they lived in | Law 112/1995 (Romanian) |
| 28 October 1999 | European Court of Human Rights, Brumărescu v. Romania | ECHR press release |
| 8 February 2001 | Law 10/2001 on property taken "abusively". Restitution notices were filed until 14 February 2002 | Law 10/2001 (Romanian) |
| 19 July 2005 | Law 247/2005 on reform in the fields of property and justice | Law 247/2005 (Romanian) |
| 12 October 2010 | "Pilot" judgment Maria Atanasiu v. Romania: the restitution mechanism is ineffective | ECHR |
| 16 May 2013 | Law 165/2013 to complete restitution: in kind where possible, compensation in points where not | Law 165/2013 (Romanian) |
The story: the Brumărescu family house
In 1950 the state nationalised the house of Dan Brumărescu's parents in Bucharest, without compensation. According to the European Court of Human Rights, it was a house built in 1930, with a basement, a ground floor, two storeys above and two garages. The son went on living there, as a tenant, in one flat inside his parents' house.
On 9 December 1993, after the revolution, the Bucharest Court of First Instance ruled that the nationalisation had been unlawful. Nobody appealed, and he regained the house in May 1994. He stopped paying rent and started paying tax on the house.
Then came the next round. Romania's Procurator-General applied to have the judgment quashed, and on 1 March 1995 the Supreme Court of Justice quashed it, holding that the courts had no power to review a nationalisation carried out under a legislative instrument. The tax authorities told him the house would revert to state property. Meanwhile something else emerged: the state had already sold the ground-floor flat to its tenants in 1973, and their heir argued that it could not be returned without committing a "fresh injustice".
On 28 October 1999 the European Court of Human Rights, sitting as a Grand Chamber, found that Romania had violated his right to a fair hearing and his right to property. In its judgment on compensation, in January 2001, the Court ordered Romania to restore the rest of the house to him, or pay him its value, without prejudice to the claims of the ground-floor owner, which were left to the Romanian courts.
This story holds everything a buyer needs to understand: a former owner, a state that sold, a tenant who bought in good faith, and judgments that were reversed. Each of them can claim the property is theirs.
Forty years of nationalisation
Nationalisation in Romania was not a single step. On 23 March 1945 Law 187/1945 set out a land reform that expropriated estates over 50 hectares and handed land to peasants. In 1949 the party decided to collectivise, and by 1962 almost all farmland had been moved into collective farms and state ownership.
In the cities, Decree 92 of 19 April 1950, in force on its publication the next day, nationalised buildings belonging to "former industrialists, former bankers, former big merchants" and "exploiters of housing". The property passed to the state without compensation. The decree excluded property of workers, officials, small craftsmen, professionals and pensioners, and the question of whether a particular property had been taken lawfully later reached the courts many times, as in the Brumărescu story.
After 1989: give it back, but to whom?
Restitution in Romania came in waves, each with its own rules:
In most deals this will not be a problem. But where it is, it is the only problem that matters, and you check it before the money, not after.
- Law 18/1991 returned farmland to former owners or their heirs, through local commissions that issued "ownership titles".
- Law 112/1995 dealt with nationalised flats. It provided limited restitution and also allowed tenants living in state flats to buy them.
- Law 10/2001 extended restitution to any property taken "abusively" between 6 March 1945 and 22 December 1989, in kind where possible and through compensation where not. The deadline for restitution notices was extended twice and closed on 14 February 2002.
- Law 247/2005 amended and extended the earlier laws.
The result was a complicated system. On 12 October 2010, in Maria Atanasiu v. Romania, the European Court of Human Rights found that the ineffectiveness of the restitution and compensation mechanism was a "recurrent and large-scale problem", and noted that several hundred similar applications were pending before it. The Court wrote explicitly that the many legislative changes had produced inconsistent case law and a general lack of legal certainty, including about the rights of third parties who acquired the properties.
Romania's answer was Law 165/2013, of May 2013: restitution in kind where possible, and compensation in "points" through the National Authority for Property Restitution (ANRP) where not.
Why it still matters in 2026
Not because every property in Bucharest is at risk. Most properties have since gone through several transactions, been registered, mortgaged to banks and rebuilt. The risk sits in specific cases:
- An old house in Bucharest nationalised in 1950 and later sold to tenants, as in the Brumărescu story.
- Land in Ilfov that reached the seller directly from a 1990s "ownership title", with no registered transactions in between.
- A property not yet fully registered in the land register, or whose extract carries a note about legal proceedings.
We wrote about the situation in Ilfov in detail in the article on restitution claims in Ilfov, and checked common claims on the subject in the fact check on Romanian property claims.
How to check a property before you buy
A fresh land register extract
The extract (extras de carte funciară) shows the registered owner, mortgages, seizures and, above all, notes about legal proceedings (notare litigiu). Such a note is a stop sign until you understand it. How to read an extract is in the extract guide.
The ownership chain back to the origin
Ask your lawyer or notary to trace the ownership chain backwards: where the property came from, from whom and when. A property that originates in an ownership title under Law 18/1991, or in restitution under Law 10/2001, needs a check of the original document and of the decision it rests on.
A court search
On the courts portal (portal.just.ro) search the names of the owners in the chain, and cases concerning "fond funciar" or "Legea 10/2001". Try several spellings, with and without ș and ț.
A written enquiry at the city hall
The local land commission works alongside the city hall. A written request asking whether there are open restitution claims on the plot gives you a documented answer. The same applies to an old house in Bucharest.
What this means for you as a buyer
- A fresh extract before any payment. Including a check for notes about legal proceedings.
- The ownership chain back to the origin for any older property and any land.
- A court portal search on the names in the chain, not just the seller.
- A written enquiry at the city hall about open restitution claims.
- Extra caution with land coming straight from an ownership title, an unregistered property, or a price far below the area with no explanation.
- An independent lawyer who represents only you. How to choose one is in the article on choosing a lawyer.
Frequently asked questions
What was Decree 92/1950?
A decree of 19 April 1950 that nationalised buildings belonging to those the regime called the "big bourgeoisie" and "exploiters of housing", as well as hotels and similar property. The property passed to the state without compensation. Many cases about old houses in Bucharest begin with this decree.
What does Law 10/2001 do?
It governs the restitution of property taken "abusively" between 6 March 1945 and 22 December 1989: in kind where possible, and through compensation where not. The deadline for restitution notices under it closed on 14 February 2002.
Can someone still file a new restitution claim today?
The deadline for notices under Law 10/2001 closed in 2002, but cases opened then, and requests under the land laws, may still be in progress or in court. So the check is not "could someone sue tomorrow" but "is there an open proceeding on the property today".
What is compensation in "points"?
Under Law 165/2013, when a property cannot be returned in kind, the former owner receives compensation in points set through the National Authority for Property Restitution (ANRP). The mechanism was designed to close the old files, after the European Court found in 2010 that the previous mechanism did not work.
Is a flat in a new project exposed to a restitution claim?
The risk is far lower, because the land of an organised project has already been checked and registered, and usually mortgaged to a bank that checked it. Even so, a fresh extract and a check of the land's ownership chain are part of the standard check, ours included.
The bottom line
Communism in Romania took houses and land for forty years, and restitution has now been going on for more than thirty. Between the two processes, cases arose where the same property has more than one legitimate owner. Most buyers will never meet such a problem, but anyone buying an older house or land should check for it, document by document, before the money.
If you are considering an older property or land, or want to check one you already own, book a half-hour call with me and we will go through the checklist together.
Moti Azulay, Compass Group Romania
Sources: Law 187/1945, the land reform (cdep.ro) (Romanian) · Decree 92/1950 (legislatie.just.ro) (Romanian) · Decree 92/1950 (cdep.ro) (Romanian) · Adevărul: how collectivisation happened (Romanian) · Descoperă: 1962, the end of collectivisation (Romanian) · Law 18/1991 (Romanian) · Law 112/1995 (Romanian) · Law 10/2001 (Romanian) · Legeaz: the notice deadline under Law 10/2001 (Romanian) · Law 247/2005 (Romanian) · Law 165/2013 (Romanian) · ECHR: Brumărescu v. Romania, press release, 28.10.1999 · ECHR: Brumărescu, just satisfaction judgment, 23.1.2001 · ECHR: Maria Atanasiu v. Romania, 12.10.2010 · National Authority for Property Restitution (ANRP) (Romanian) · Romanian courts portal (Romanian)
This article is general information only and is not legal advice. The rules are correct as of 17 October 2026. Before deciding, consult an independent lawyer.
The series: a history lesson
- From Rome and Dacia: why Romanian is a Latin language
- Three principalities and two unions: 1859 and 1918
- Nationalisation and restitution: why land claims still exist (you are here)
- The rise and fall of Ceaușescu
- 1989 and the move to a market economy
- The EU and Schengen
- Faith, holidays and business
- The Jews of Romania and the bond with Israel
- Bucharest, "Little Paris"
Now you know more.
This article is general information, not legal, tax or financial advice. Consult local professionals before any transaction.
