Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Role of EU Principles in Criminal Law: is the Principle of Direct Effect Applicable? Cover

The Role of EU Principles in Criminal Law: is the Principle of Direct Effect Applicable?

Open Access
|Mar 2021

References

  1. 1. Court of Justice of the European Union. Annual Report of Court of Justice 2017, Judicial Activity. Luxembourg, 2018 // https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2018-06/ra_2017_lt_web.pdf.
  2. 2. Court of Justice of the European Union. Annual Report of Court of Justice 2018, Judicial Activity. Luxembourg, 2019 // https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2019-06/_ra_2018_lt.pdf.
  3. 3. Court of Justice of the European Union. Annual Report of Court of Justice 2019, Judicial Activity. Luxembourg, 2020 // https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-05/qd-ap-20-001-en-n.pdf.
  4. 4. Gilbert, Eleanor. “Supremacy and Direct Effect: Necessary Measures?” North East Law Review 5 (2017): 11–15.
  5. 5. Herlin-Karnell, Ester. “The Lisbon Treaty and the Area of Criminal Law and Justice. European Policy Analysis.” Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies 3 (2008): 1–10.
  6. 6. Herlin-Karnell, Ester. “The Lisbon Treaty. A Critical Analysis of its Impact on EU Criminal Law.” Eucrim 2 (2010): 59–65.10.2139/ssrn.2167743
  7. 7. Herlin-Karnell, Ester. “What Principles Drive (or Should Drive) European Criminal Law?” German Law Journal 11, no. 10 (2010): 1115–1130.10.1017/S2071832200020137
  8. 8. Karayigit, Mustafa T. “Are Directives Directly Applicable?” Ankara Avrupa Calismalari Dergisi 15, no. 2 (2016): 59–95.10.1501/Avraras_0000000235
  9. 9. Klimek, Libor. European Arrest Warrant. London: Springer, 2015.10.1007/978-3-319-07338-5
  10. 10. Miettinen, Samuli. Criminal Law and Policy in the European Union. London and New York: Routledge, 2014.
  11. 11. Mitsilegas, Valsamis. EU Criminal Law. Oxford and Portland, OR: Bloomsbury, 2009.
  12. 12. Robin-Olivier, Sophie. “The Evolution of Direct Effect in the EU: Stocktaking Problems, Projections.” International Law Journal of Constitutional Law 12, no. 1 (2014): 165–188.10.1093/icon/mou007
  13. 13. Samulytė-Mamontovė, Aistė. “Principle of Legal Certainty and (In)direct Effect of Directives.” Social Transformations in Contemporary Society 2 (2014): 57–68.
  14. 14. Soloveičikas, Deidvidas. “Europos Sąjungos teisės tiesioginis veikimas ir jos taikymas – dvi skirtingos tapačios doktrinos dalys?” (Direct Effect and Application of European Community Law: Two Distinct Parts of the Same Doctrine?). Jurisprudencija 4, no. 94 (2007): 35–43.
  15. 15. Švedas, Gintaras. “Europos Sąjungos teisės įtaka Lietuvos baudžiamajai teisei” (The Influence of EU Law on Lithuanian Criminal Law). Teisė 74 (2010): 7–20.10.15388/Teise.2010.0.262
  16. 16. Vlaicu, Anca-Magda. “The Direct Effect of Treaty Provisions.” Lex et Scientia International Journal 16 (2009): 235–249.
  17. 17. Vukadinovic, Radovan D. “The Concept and Faces of Direct Effect of European Community Law.” Review of European Law 13, no. 1 (2011): 35–48.
  18. 1. A.G., M.P. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-281-489.
  19. 2. Alcoa Trasformazioni v Commission. CJEU, C-194/09, ECLI:EU:C:2011:497.
  20. 3. Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Official Journal C 202, 7.6.2016, P. 1-388.
  21. 4. Cooperativa Agricola Zootecnica S. Antonio and Others v Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato. CJEU, C-246/94, C-247/94, C-248/94 and C-249/94, ECLI:EU:C:1996:329.
  22. 5. Criminal Code of Republic of Lithuania. Official Gazette, 2000, no. 89-2741.
  23. 6. D.L. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2014, no. 2K-389.
  24. 7. Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the Freezing and Confiscation of Instrumentalities and Proceeds of Crime in the European Union. 2014, OJ L 127/39.
  25. 8. Directive 2019/713 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on Combating Fraud and Counterfeiting of Non-Cash Means of Payment and Replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/413/JHA. 2019, OJ L 123/18.
  26. 9. E.J. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-199-648.
  27. 10. Edgar Babanov. CJEU, C-207/08, ECLI:EU:C:2008:407.10.1162/jcws.2008.10.3.207
  28. 11. Fibre Hemp Law of the Republic of Lithuania. Official Gazette, 2013, no. 61-3025.
  29. 12. Flaminio Costa v E.N.E.L. CJEU. Case 6-64, ECLI:EU:C:1964.
  30. 13. Franz Grad v Finanzamt Traunstein. CJEU, C-9/70, ECLI:EU:C:1970:78.
  31. 14. J.V., A.Z. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-290-489.
  32. 15. K.J. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-278-697.
  33. 16. Kolpinghuis Nijmegen BV. CJEU, C-80/86, ECLI:EU:C:1987:431.
  34. 17. Maria Pupino. CJEU, C-105/03, ECLI:EU:C:2005:386.
  35. 18. M.A.S. and M.B. CJEU, C-42/17, ECLI:EU:C:2017:936.10.1080/14693062.2017.1360173
  36. 19. M.H. Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching). CJEU, C-152/84, ECLI:EU:C:1986:84.
  37. 20. M.M. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2016, no. 2K-52-942.
  38. 21. NV Algemene Transporten Expeditie Onderneming van Gend & Loos v Netherlands Inland Revenue Administration. CJEU, C-26/62, ECLI:EU:C:1963.
  39. 22. P.Ž. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2014, no. 2K- 317.
  40. 23. R.K. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2007, no. 2K-531.
  41. 24. S.S., S.G., R.P. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2012, no. 2K-332.
  42. 25. Salvatore Grimaldi v Fonds des maladies professionnelles. CJEU, C-322/88, ECLI:EU:C:1989:646.
  43. 26. State v A.L. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2015, no. 2K-242-511.
  44. 27. State v A.R. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2007, no. 2K- 319.
  45. 28. State v J.A.G. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2010, no. 2K-383.
  46. 29. State v R.N. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2011, no. 2K-239.
  47. 30. Tarrico and Others. CJEU, C-105/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:555.
  48. 31. Tullio Ratti. CJEU, C-148/78, ECLI:EU:C:1979:110.10.1093/oxfordjournals.afraf.a097075
  49. 32. Yvonne van Duyn v Home Office. CJEU, C-41/74, ECLI:EU:C:1974:133.
Language: English
Page range: 49 - 75
Submitted on: Oct 19, 2020
Accepted on: Dec 29, 2020
Published on: Mar 18, 2021
Published by: Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy and the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania)
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2021 Edita Gruodytė, Saulė Milčiuvienė, Neringa Palionienė, published by Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy and the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania)
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.