Divorce and children · all 179 local courts
Who gets the children: what Romania's courts decide after a divorce
When parents in Romania separate in court, a judge at the local court (judecătorie) decides where the child will live. Of 8,016 rulings on cases filed in 2024 and the first half of 2025, 80% placed the children with the mother, 17% with the father, and 3% split siblings between the parents. The share differs from court to court by more than chance can explain.
No court by that name.
The court that serves the place where the parents live.
Pick a court to see how its children were placed.
The rulings were read by software and then checked: on 300 rulings drawn at random, it read where the child was placed correctly in 95.3% of cases. On the same 300 rulings (a different set from the one behind the national figure), among those placing the child with a parent, the reference readings give 18.8% with the father and the software 19.5%. How it was checked
The interactive data did not load. The figures below and the table still stand.
Where children go to the father more often
Each area is the district of one local court, coloured by the share of rulings that placed the children with the father. The colour adds the equivalent of 50 rulings at the national rate to every court, so a court with a handful of rulings does not stand out by luck alone; the exact numbers appear on a click. Hatched areas have fewer than ten rulings, or a court that publishes too little of its decisions to be read. Tap an area for its numbers.
The gaps between courts are larger than chance can explain
At the Băilești court, 40 of 89 rulings (45%) placed the children with the father. At the Constanța court, 28 of 289 (10%). The national average is 17%.
A small court can land far from the average by luck alone, so the chart below also shows the band a court of a given size stays inside 95% of the time if it is no different from the rest. Of the 129 courts compared, chance alone would push about six outside the band. 17 are outside: 13 above the average and four below. Any one of them, taken alone, may still be one of the chance cases.
The spread that remains once chance and each court's mix of cases (divorce or separate application, with or without the parents' agreement) are allowed for has been measured, and its confidence interval stays clear of zero (82 courts with at least 30 rulings). The order also holds over time: courts that placed children with fathers more often in the first half of 2024 did so more often in the first half of 2025 too (correlation 0.41, 34 courts).
Every local court: share placed with the father against the number of rulings
The band shows how far a court can stray by chance. Coloured dots are the courts outside it.
The courts outside the band
Above the average
- Orșova 62% 8 of 13 · 36–82%
- Lehliu Gară 50% 5 of 10 · 24–76%
- Băilești 45% 40 of 89 · 35–55%
- Segarcea 38% 8 of 21 · 21–59%
- Strehaia 35% 12 of 34 · 21–52%
- Zimnicea 34% 14 of 41 · 22–49%
- Costești 33% 9 of 27 · 19–52%
- Făget 33% 8 of 24 · 18–53%
- Corabia 30% 13 of 43 · 19–45%
- Pogoanele 30% 13 of 43 · 19–45%
- Oltenița 29% 12 of 41 · 18–44%
- Panciu 28% 13 of 46 · 17–43%
- Reghin 28% 15 of 54 · 18–41%
For each of these courts, ten randomly drawn rulings (nine at Lehliu Gară) were re-read independently by two language models: the software had read at least nine in ten correctly at every one. The check shows that the rulings it read were read well; it cannot show rulings the software missed altogether. The Iași court also falls below the average, but it was used to build the reading software, so it gets no verdict here.
Parental authority stays with both parents in four cases out of five
Where a child lives and who holds parental authority are separate questions. Authority is the right and the duty to take the big decisions (school, medical treatment, a passport). Since 2011 Romania's Civil Code leaves it with both parents as a rule, even when the child lives with one of them, and a court may give it to one parent only for "well-founded reasons".
Of 7,192 rulings that say how authority is exercised, 80% left it with both parents. When a court gave it to one parent, it chose the mother four times as often as the father (16% against 4% of all).
Here the software missed the bar set in advance: on 300 rulings drawn at random it read authority correctly in 94.0% of cases, short of the 95% required. Every miss is of the same kind: a ruling where it failed to find the authority clause that was there. In all 153 sample rulings where it found the clause, it read it correctly. On the same rulings the reference readings found joint authority in 73.1% of the cases where authority was decided, and the software in 74.5%.
The press figure, "80–90% of children stay with the mother", has no source
For years Romanian articles and forums have repeated that 80, 85 or 90% of children are left with the mother after a divorce. None of these figures points to a count: not to the Superior Council of Magistracy, the judiciary's governing council, nor to the National Institute of Statistics, which publishes no such thing. Most predate 2011, when the law changed.
The count here gives 80% to the mother among rulings that place the child with one parent. That is not the same as where the children of separated parents live: a 2021 European survey (EU-SILC) found, on a small sample of 103 Romanian children, 58.1% living only with the mother and 25.7% only with the father. The gap may come from parents who never go to court and from children who move after the ruling.
What else the data show
The tests above were fixed before any court-level rate was computed. Apart from the parents' agreement and the appeals, the ones here turned up along the way. They are leads worth following, with their numbers, and without a tested explanation.
Teenagers go to the father more often than small children
Some courts write the child's date of birth into the ruling, which gives the age on the day of the ruling (1,465 rulings whose summary gives a single date of birth, from 151 courts, for cases filed any time after October 2023). Children under three were placed with the father in 14% of cases, teenagers aged 14–17 in 27%. The gap shows up in divorces (8% against 23%) and in separate applications (24% against 45%). From the age of ten a child must be heard by the court.
In separate applications, fathers get the child more often than in divorces
Most rulings come out of a divorce. The rest are separate applications about the child, filed by unmarried parents or after a divorce, often to change an earlier ruling. In divorces the child was placed with the father in 14% of 5,619 rulings. In separate applications, in 23% of 2,397. On the randomly drawn rulings used for the check, the reference readings give close shares: 14% and 28%.
When the parents agree, the child seems to stay with the mother more often
This comparison was planned in advance, but the software reads the parents' agreement poorly, so the reference readings of the randomly drawn rulings are used here. Those where the residence was set by the parents' agreement placed the child with the father in five of 40 cases (13%). Those where no agreement is recorded, in 21% of 125. The intervals overlap, so the gap could be chance.
Among the appeals that could be read, children placed with the father were moved more often
Rulings can be appealed to the county court (tribunal). Of 20,677 rulings on residence, 1,696 could be found on appeal (8%), most still pending (1,221). Among finished appeals whose outcome could be read, the residence was changed in 12 of 48 cases where the first court had placed the child with the father (25%) and in 10 of 241 where it had chosen the mother (4%). The counts are small, and the reading of appeal rulings was not checked at all.
Children left in the care of relatives
The same kind of case shows something else: parents who go to work abroad and ask the court to hand parental authority temporarily to a relative, usually a grandparent. Romania's child-protection law requires the departure to be notified, and the court hands over authority for a year at most, renewable while the parents stay abroad. In 2024 and 2025, 5,446 such applications reached the local courts. The Odorheiu Secuiesc court alone received 824, or 15% of the total: 72.9 per 10,000 inhabitants against 2.9 on average. The other three courts in Harghita county received 126 between them, so the gap may lie in how this court registers applications (for example one per child or per renewal), not only in parents leaving to work.
Over two years, no clear trend
Month by month, for cases filed between January 2024 and December 2025 and ruled within nine months, the share of rulings placing children with the father shows no trend: the change over the whole span (1.9 percentage points) cannot be told apart from zero. Nor does joint authority.
Every local court
How many rulings on children's residence each court issued (cases filed January 2024 – June 2025, ruled within 15 months) and how often it placed the children with the father. Shares are shown from ten rulings up. "Read" is the part of the court's child rulings that could be read: some courts publish only "Admite cererea" (application granted).
| Arad† | Arad | 309 | 15% | 12–20% | 75% | 80% |
| Constanța▼ | Constanța | 289 | 10% | 7–14% | 80% | 81% |
| Iași† | Iași | 235 | 11% | 8–16% | 82% | 76% |
| Brașov† | Brașov | 188 | 14% | 10–20% | 88% | 83% |
| Bucharest Sector 2 | București | 172 | 12% | 8–17% | 77% | 79% |
| Râmnicu Vâlcea | Vâlcea | 168 | 15% | 10–21% | 81% | 91% |
| Bucharest Sector 3 | București | 159 | 11% | 7–17% | 82% | 78% |
| Satu Mare | Satu Mare | 152 | 16% | 11–22% | 77% | 64% |
| Târgu Jiu | Gorj | 146 | 18% | 12–25% | 93% | 85% |
| Bucharest Sector 4† | București | 141 | 13% | 8–19% | 82% | 71% |
| Călărași | Călărași | 138 | 20% | 14–27% | 74% | 89% |
| Timișoara▼ | Timiș | 132 | 8% | 5–14% | 76% | 63% |
| Brăila | Brăila | 124 | 15% | 10–23% | 80% | 63% |
| Focșani | Vrancea | 119 | 18% | 13–26% | 84% | 86% |
| Bacău | Bacău | 118 | 11% | 7–18% | 69% | 73% |
| Medgidia | Constanța | 117 | 20% | 13–28% | 77% | 79% |
| Câmpulung | Argeș | 113 | 18% | 12–26% | 90% | 53% |
| Sibiu | Sibiu | 105 | 17% | 11–25% | 84% | 73% |
| Pitești | Argeș | 104 | 14% | 9–22% | 93% | 54% |
| Cluj-Napoca† | Cluj | 102 | 11% | 6–18% | 78% | 73% |
| Pașcani | Iași | 98 | 15% | 10–24% | 63% | 80% |
| Băilești▲ | Dolj | 89 | 45% | 35–55% | 90% | 79% |
| Buzău▼ | Buzău | 89 | 8% | 4–15% | 83% | 86% |
| Târgoviște | Dâmbovița | 89 | 18% | 11–27% | 80% | 82% |
| Mediaș | Sibiu | 88 | 14% | 8–22% | 74% | 83% |
| Hunedoara | Hunedoara | 85 | 15% | 9–24% | 75% | 65% |
| Bistrița | Bistrița-Năsăud | 84 | 18% | 11–27% | 86% | 95% |
| Onești | Bacău | 84 | 14% | 8–23% | 75% | 74% |
| Piatra-Neamț | Neamț | 82 | 11% | 6–20% | 76% | 79% |
| Vaslui | Vaslui | 78 | 14% | 8–24% | 76% | 81% |
| Bucharest Sector 1† | București | 77 | 16% | 9–25% | 71% | 74% |
| Bucharest Sector 6 | București | 71 | 13% | 7–22% | 83% | 70% |
| Drobeta-Turnu Severin | Mehedinți | 69 | 13% | 7–23% | 80% | 62% |
| Ineu | Arad | 68 | 24% | 15–35% | 77% | 84% |
| Târgu Neamț | Neamț | 65 | 8% | 3–17% | 82% | 89% |
| Balș | Olt | 63 | 19% | 11–30% | 87% | 69% |
| Mangalia | Constanța | 63 | 10% | 4–19% | 84% | 84% |
| Odorheiu Secuiesc | Harghita | 63 | – | – | 80% | 8% |
| Reșița | Caraș-Severin | 63 | – | – | 88% | 48% |
| Sfântu Gheorghe | Covasna | 60 | 20% | 12–32% | 94% | 66% |
| Sighișoara | Mureș | 60 | 18% | 11–30% | 86% | 94% |
| Sânnicolau Mare | Timiș | 59 | 25% | 16–38% | 83% | 86% |
| Horezu | Vâlcea | 58 | 17% | 10–29% | 87% | 89% |
| Lugoj | Timiș | 57 | 11% | 5–21% | 73% | 95% |
| Motru | Gorj | 57 | 25% | 15–37% | 95% | 61% |
| Reghin▲* | Mureș | 54 | 28% | 18–41% | 94% | 84% |
| Turda | Cluj | 54 | – | – | 83% | 41% |
| Giurgiu | Giurgiu | 52 | 21% | 12–34% | 84% | 75% |
| Ploiești | Prahova | 52 | 19% | 11–32% | 63% | 78% |
| Sighetu Marmației | Maramureș | 52 | 19% | 11–32% | 88% | 84% |
| Târgu Secuiesc | Covasna | 52 | 12% | 5–23% | 76% | 76% |
| Curtea de Argeș | Argeș | 49 | 24% | 15–38% | 76% | 80% |
| Pătârlagele | Buzău | 48 | 23% | 13–37% | 86% | 83% |
| Beiuș | Bihor | 46 | 20% | 11–33% | 79% | 74% |
| Panciu▲ | Vrancea | 46 | 28% | 17–43% | 84% | 68% |
| Răcari | Dâmbovița | 45 | 7% | 2–18% | 85% | 76% |
| Chișineu-Criș | Arad | 44 | 23% | 13–37% | 79% | 73% |
| Fetești | Ialomița | 44 | 27% | 16–42% | 60% | 90% |
| Corabia▲ | Olt | 43 | 30% | 19–45% | 83% | 73% |
| Pogoanele▲ | Buzău | 43 | 30% | 19–45% | 79% | 93% |
| Huși | Vaslui | 42 | 14% | 7–28% | 95% | 65% |
| Pucioasa | Dâmbovița | 42 | 24% | 13–39% | 92% | 70% |
| Deva | Hunedoara | 41 | 15% | 7–28% | 75% | 69% |
| Oltenița▲ | Călărași | 41 | 29% | 18–44% | 69% | 80% |
| Zimnicea▲ | Teleorman | 41 | 34% | 22–49% | 95% | 89% |
| Drăgășani | Vâlcea | 40 | 13% | 5–26% | 86% | 70% |
| Tulcea | Tulcea | 40 | 15% | 7–29% | 87% | 81% |
| Hârlău | Iași | 39 | – | – | 56% | 29% |
| Roman | Neamț | 39 | – | – | 79% | 41% |
| Urziceni | Ialomița | 39 | 23% | 13–38% | 75% | 85% |
| Dragomirești | Maramureș | 38 | 16% | 7–30% | 75% | 68% |
| Miercurea Ciuc | Harghita | 38 | – | – | 74% | 34% |
| Vatra Dornei | Suceava | 37 | 16% | 8–31% | 94% | 76% |
| Marghita | Bihor | 36 | 11% | 4–25% | 91% | 97% |
| Calafat | Dolj | 35 | 17% | 8–33% | 88% | 92% |
| Făgăraș | Brașov | 35 | 26% | 14–42% | 87% | 76% |
| Măcin | Brăila | 35 | 20% | 10–36% | 76% | 88% |
| Babadag | Tulcea | 34 | 21% | 10–37% | 73% | 85% |
| Slobozia | Ialomița | 34 | 18% | 8–34% | 50% | 68% |
| Strehaia▲ | Mehedinți | 34 | 35% | 21–52% | 75% | 85% |
| Buhuși | Bacău | 33 | 15% | 7–31% | 71% | 63% |
| Moinești | Bacău | 33 | 21% | 11–38% | 84% | 59% |
| Rupea | Brașov | 32 | 9% | 3–24% | 93% | 97% |
| Salonta | Bihor | 32 | 19% | 9–35% | 70% | 74% |
| Gura Humorului | Suceava | 31 | 29% | 16–47% | 93% | 72% |
| Moreni | Dâmbovița | 31 | 29% | 16–47% | 70% | 72% |
| Adjud† | Vrancea | 30 | 23% | 12–41% | 76% | 79% |
| Caracal* | Olt | 30 | 20% | 10–37% | 96% | 70% |
| Gherla | Cluj | 29 | 10% | 4–26% | 83% | 87% |
| Zalău | Sălaj | 29 | – | – | 90% | 41% |
| Hârșova | Constanța | 29 | 24% | 12–42% | 56% | 97% |
| Brezoi | Vâlcea | 28 | 11% | 4–27% | 78% | 82% |
| Găești | Dâmbovița | 28 | 18% | 8–36% | 84% | 65% |
| Râmnicu Sărat | Buzău | 28 | 18% | 8–36% | 87% | 74% |
| Bicaz | Neamț | 27 | 15% | 6–32% | 88% | 90% |
| Câmpina | Prahova | 27 | 22% | 11–41% | 71% | 60% |
| Costești▲ | Argeș | 27 | 33% | 19–52% | 80% | 90% |
| Toplița | Harghita | 27 | – | – | 87% | 47% |
| Cornetu | Ilfov | 27 | 15% | 6–32% | 78% | 78% |
| Dej | Cluj | 26 | 12% | 4–29% | 96% | 79% |
| Baia Mare | Maramureș | 25 | 16% | 6–35% | 88% | 71% |
| Beclean | Bistrița-Năsăud | 25 | 12% | 4–30% | 86% | 76% |
| Gheorgheni | Harghita | 25 | 12% | 4–30% | 95% | 54% |
| Orăștie | Hunedoara | 25 | 16% | 6–35% | 80% | 74% |
| Bolintin-Vale | Giurgiu | 24 | 21% | 9–40% | 83% | 89% |
| Năsăud | Bistrița-Năsăud | 24 | 8% | 2–26% | 92% | 86% |
| Oravița | Caraș-Severin | 24 | – | – | 82% | 40% |
| Șimleu Silvaniei | Sălaj | 24 | – | – | 89% | 46% |
| Topoloveni | Argeș | 24 | 21% | 9–40% | 81% | 73% |
| Făget▲ | Timiș | 24 | 33% | 18–53% | 76% | 75% |
| Aiud | Alba | 23 | 22% | 10–42% | 81% | 77% |
| Sebeș | Alba | 23 | 13% | 5–32% | 100% | 85% |
| Zărnești | Brașov | 23 | 9% | 2–27% | 85% | 92% |
| Brad | Hunedoara | 22 | 5% | 1–22% | 86% | 54% |
| Bălcești | Vâlcea | 21 | 14% | 5–35% | 76% | 70% |
| Segarcea▲ | Dolj | 21 | 38% | 21–59% | 65% | 96% |
| Jibou | Sălaj | 21 | 19% | 8–40% | 88% | 74% |
| Liești | Galați | 20 | 15% | 5–36% | 56% | 59% |
| Bucharest Sector 5 | București | 19 | – | – | 72% | 49% |
| Carei | Satu Mare | 18 | – | – | 100% | 35% |
| Făurei | Brăila | 18 | 28% | 13–51% | 73% | 86% |
| Oradea* | Bihor | 18 | – | – | 76% | 44% |
| Bârlad | Vaslui | 17 | 24% | 10–47% | 55% | 64% |
| Câmpeni | Alba | 17 | 18% | 6–41% | 94% | 68% |
| Tecuci* | Galați | 17 | 18% | 6–41% | 92% | 71% |
| Turnu Măgurele | Teleorman | 17 | 29% | 13–53% | 50% | 77% |
| Gurahonț | Arad | 16 | – | – | 77% | 47% |
| Moldova Nouă | Caraș-Severin | 16 | 6% | 1–28% | 83% | 53% |
| Răducăneni | Iași | 16 | 13% | 4–36% | 44% | 84% |
| Avrig | Sibiu | 16 | – | – | 77% | 34% |
| Agnita | Sibiu | 15 | 13% | 4–38% | 73% | 88% |
| Suceava | Suceava | 15 | 13% | 4–38% | 75% | 68% |
| Craiova | Dolj | 14 | 29% | 12–55% | 46% | 54% |
| Fălticeni | Suceava | 14 | 29% | 12–55% | 67% | 74% |
| Târgu Cărbunești | Gorj | 14 | – | – | 85% | 33% |
| Vișeu de Sus | Maramureș | 14 | 36% | 16–61% | 82% | 50% |
| Orșova▲ | Mehedinți | 13 | 62% | 36–82% | 91% | 81% |
| Slatina | Olt | 13 | 23% | 8–50% | 82% | 81% |
| Târgu Lăpuș | Maramureș | 13 | 23% | 8–50% | 75% | 87% |
| Aleșd | Bihor | 12 | – | – | 92% | 44% |
| Blaj | Alba | 12 | 0% | 0–24% | 83% | 65% |
| Mizil | Prahova | 11 | 9% | 2–38% | 80% | 79% |
| Vânju Mare | Mehedinți | 11 | – | – | – | 30% |
| Buftea† | Ilfov | 10 | 0% | 0–28% | 70% | 63% |
| Lehliu Gară▲ | Călărași | 10 | 50% | 24–76% | 60% | 100% |
| Săliște | Sibiu | 10 | 10% | 2–40% | 90% | 77% |
| Târnăveni | Mureș | 10 | 10% | 2–40% | – | 85% |
| Baia de Aramă | Mehedinți | 9 | – | – | – | 71% |
| Galați | Galați | 9 | – | – | – | 49% |
| Botoșani | Botoșani | 8 | – | – | – | 28% |
| Hațeg | Hunedoara | 8 | – | – | – | 36% |
| Întorsura Buzăului* | Covasna | 8 | – | – | – | 80% |
| Târgu Mureș | Mureș | 8 | – | – | – | 66% |
| Videle | Teleorman | 8 | – | – | – | 75% |
| Podu Turcului | Bacău | 8 | – | – | – | – |
| Darabani* | Botoșani | 7 | – | – | – | – |
| Dorohoi | Botoșani | 7 | – | – | – | 62% |
| Lipova | Arad | 7 | – | – | – | – |
| Săveni | Botoșani | 7 | – | – | – | 64% |
| Târgu Bujor | Galați | 7 | – | – | – | 67% |
| Huedin | Cluj | 6 | – | – | – | – |
| Negrești-Oaș | Satu Mare | 6 | – | – | – | 18% |
| Caransebeș | Caraș-Severin | 5 | – | – | – | 26% |
| Filiași | Dolj | 5 | – | – | – | – |
| Novaci | Gorj | 5 | – | – | – | – |
| Rădăuți | Suceava | 5 | – | – | – | 16% |
| Vălenii de Munte | Prahova | 5 | – | – | – | 50% |
| Alexandria | Teleorman | 5 | – | – | – | – |
| Câmpulung Moldovenesc | Suceava | 4 | – | – | – | 40% |
| Luduș | Mureș | 4 | – | – | – | – |
| Petroșani | Hunedoara | 4 | – | – | – | 2% |
| Sinaia | Prahova | 3 | – | – | – | 30% |
| Alba Iulia | Alba | 2 | – | – | – | – |
| Deta | Timiș | 2 | – | – | – | – |
| Roșiori de Vede | Teleorman | 2 | – | – | – | – |
| Bozovici | Caraș-Severin | 0 | – | – | – | – |
| Însurăței | Brăila | 0 | – | – | – | – |
| Murgeni | Vaslui | 0 | – | – | – | – |
| Șomcuta Mare | Maramureș | 0 | – | – | – | – |
▲▼ above average, outside the band / below average, outside the band · † used to build the reading software · * The public portal shows far fewer family cases from this court from 2025 on. The figures come mostly from applications filed in 2024.
How the software's reading was checked
The summary of every ruling (the part where the court states what it decided) is public on the courts' portal. Software read each one and extracted where the child lives and who holds parental authority. Its rules were written on the rulings of eight courts, which were then kept out of the checks. Before any court-level rate was computed, the analysis rules and a bar were fixed and dated: the software must read at least 95% of randomly drawn rulings correctly.
The check was run three times, each time by language models that could not see the software's answer. The first time (90.7%) the software made systematic errors, such as taking a relative given care of the child for the mother, so it was corrected and frozen. The second time, on other rulings, it scored 94.7%, one case short. The third time, with a method set in advance, 619 fresh rulings were each read separately by two different language models that never saw the software's answer. The nine cases where the two disagreed were settled by a third, equally blind.
| Check | Residence | Authority | Bar |
|---|---|---|---|
| First (before fixes) | 90.7% | 95.7% | 95% |
| Second (software frozen) | 94.7% | 97.3% | 95% |
| Third (two independent readings) | 95.3% | 94.0% | 95% |
Result of the third check: the child's residence read correctly in 95.3% of 300 rulings, above the bar; "with the father" rulings read correctly in 96.7% of cases, and of the rulings that really were "with the father", the software found 93.5%. Parental authority came out at 94.0%, below the bar. The rule set in advance for that case required the page to be published with the accuracy printed beside the numbers, as it is here.
The original rule said that if the software missed the bar, the numbers would not be published. After the first two misses the author asked for the page to be built anyway, so the rule was changed: a third check, with its method and consequences written down and dated before the sample was drawn. The original bar is still unmet for authority. "Correct" here means the same answer as the reference readings, which were also made by language models, not by people.
On the same rulings the software gave 19.5% "with the father" and the two independent readings 18.8%: an overstatement of 0.7 points. The national figure of 16.8% comes from a different set of rulings (granted applications only, ruled within 15 months), so it does not compare directly with these.
What this count cannot tell
- It covers only parents who go to court. Since 2010, parents who agree on everything can divorce at a notary, even with minor children (at the civil registry only without minor children). How many do so is not published separately.
- The courts' portal shows only part of the cases filed before December 2023, so the change since the 2011 law cannot be measured.
- The count covers 80% of the divorce cases registered at local courts in 2024 according to the Superior Council of Magistracy, and 81% in 2025.
- In a third of the granted rulings concerning children, the summary does not show where the child lives (coverage 66%): some courts publish only "Admite cererea", and some rulings set no residence. Courts where the summary shows the residence in under half of cases are left out of the comparisons.
- At Caracal, Darabani, Întorsura Buzăului, Oradea, Reghin and Tecuci, the public portal shows far fewer family cases from 2025 than from 2024; their figures come mostly from 2024. At a few other courts (Slatina, Târgu Mureș, Roșiori de Vede) family cases are almost absent, so they do not appear in the comparisons.
- Between 27% and 32% of the child cases filed in a half-year had not been decided after 15 months. They are not in the figures, and long cases may be the most bitterly fought.
- The numbers say what the courts decided, not why. A court may place children with fathers more often because more fathers ask there, because mothers are away, or because of how it judges. The data cannot tell these apart.
- A ruling can be changed on appeal or later, and a child can move without a new ruling.
The method in brief
The source is the public search service of the Romanian courts' portal (portal.just.ro), queried for all 179 local courts and 51 county courts by the subject of the case ("divorce", "exercise of parental authority", "minor", "interim order"), for cases filed from October 2023 to 23 October 2026: 105,729 first-instance cases.
Names, addresses, dates of birth and case numbers were not kept. Only the sentences about the children were kept from each summary, with names masked, and the case number only as a cryptographic fingerprint, used to link an appeal to the first ruling without storing it.
The headline numbers cover divorce cases and separate applications about children filed between 1 January 2024 and 30 June 2025, ruled within 15 months of filing, granted, with the children placed with one of the parents: 8,016 rulings. "With the father" means all the children were placed with the father. Counting split siblings as well, at least one child went to the father in 20% of rulings.
The tests (spread between courts, persistence over time, monthly trend) and the bars were fixed and dated before computing. Departures from that plan are recorded, with their dates, in the project's files.
Sources
- Romanian courts' portal, public case search service
- Romanian Civil Code, arts. 396–403 (divorce and children) and 483–508 (parental authority)
- Law 272/2004 on child protection, arts. 104–105 (temporary delegation of parental authority)
- Superior Council of Magistracy, reports on the state of the judiciary (new divorce cases)
- National Institute of Statistics, divorces by number of minor children (TEMPO, POP212E)
- Claessens, E., Mortelmans, D. (2025), "Joint Physical Custody in Europe: A Comparative Exploration", European Journal of Population 41:8 (EU-SILC 2021 data)
- Government Decision 1,217/2023 on local-court districts