Under Legea 50/1991, extending a building permit was routine. The Codul urbanismului forbids it in one paragraph and grants it in the next, and the new regime is set out on the extension page.
This is something we cannot settle on our own, so we are putting it on the table as it stands.
The text, both paragraphs
Article 309 paragraph (5): “Prelungirea termenului de valabilitate a autorizațiilor prevăzut la alin. (1) este interzisă, indiferent de motivele care au condus la necesitatea solicitării prelungirii.” Extending the validity period is forbidden, whatever the reasons.
Article 309 paragraph (6): “În cazul justificat în care lucrările de construcții nu pot fi finalizate conform duratei de execuție stabilite prin autorizație, inițiatorul proiectului poate solicita autorității emitente prelungirea valabilității autorizației cu cel puțin 15 zile înaintea expirării acesteia, situație în care prelungirea valabilității autorizației se acordă pentru o perioadă de cel mult 12 luni.” Where the works justifiably cannot be finished, the extension is granted for at most 12 months.
One forbids extending validity. The next one grants it for up to 12 months. Both are in force.
How we read it
Opinion from here on, and in this case opinion about an ambiguous text, so treat it as that.
Under the code, a permit runs on two different clocks. Paragraph (1) gives a validity period of 3 years from issue. Paragraph (2) says that period “se extinde pe toată durata de execuție a lucrărilor prevăzută prin autorizație”, extends across the whole execution period set out in the permit, starting from the start date notified to the authority.
So: 3 years to begin, and then the execution period to finish.
The reading that reconciles the two paragraphs is that the ban in (5) concerns the first clock, the 3 years to begin, while (6) concerns the second, the one for finishing. The text of (6) does open on the premise that the works cannot justifiably be finished within the execution period, which supports that reading.
But it is not what it says. Paragraph (6) uses exactly the phrase paragraph (5) forbids, “extending the validity of the permit”, not “extending the execution period”. So we are giving you our reading, and telling you that it is a reading.
What holds either way
However the tension is resolved, one practical conclusion does not depend on the resolution.
The 3 years from issue to starting work can no longer be treated as elastic. What you announce on the day you begin, and to whom, is in the two înștiințări. Paragraph (5) closes the subject with “whatever the reasons” and states what you are left with: the holder “are dreptul de a începe lucrările autorizate sau poate solicita o autorizație de modificare”, has the right to start the authorised works or to apply for a modification permit.
If you have not started within 3 years, assume you begin again.
There is one relief valve, but a limited one: paragraph (4) allows validity to be suspended once only, by reasoned notification to the issuing authority, for at most 12 months.
Extending the execution period has an explicit price
Article 310 paragraph (5) governs the other clock and is far clearer. An extension of the execution period is requested at least 15 working days before expiry, granted once only, for at most 12 months, “cu achitarea unei taxe de 30% din valoarea taxei inițiale”, on payment of a fee of 30% of the original.
It is the only explicit percentage in this area, and we put it in context in the piece on cost layers.
Article 310 also says what is lost: the permit lapses if works do not begin in time, paragraph (1), if they are not finished and no extension was sought, paragraph (2), and if execution is suspended for more than 24 months, paragraph (3). Paragraph (4) takes litigation and force majeure out of the count.
Until a clarification arrives
Whether a clarification arrives, through secondary legislation or through consistent administrative practice, on how paragraphs (5) and (6) relate. Until then, a file built on the assumption that an extension will be granted is a file built on a reading, not on a text. We have written about the other transition deadlines and about what was actually repealed. A buyer inherits the same deadlines: the permit transfers by operation of law.
This article is analysis, not legal advice. The provisions cited are from Legea 169/2026, published in Monitorul Oficial no. 661 of 10 August 2026. Check your own situation with the issuing authority.