The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJUE) ruled on July 16, 2024, that the Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice (ÎCCJ) acted in violation of EU law by applying a retroactive statute of limitations standard that allowed thousands of criminal cases to be closed. According to the CJUE, this practice creates a systemic risk of impunity for serious fraud cases affecting the European Union’s financial interests, contradicting the 2023 “Lin” ruling.
The Legal Conflict: CJUE vs. Romanian Supreme Court
The latest ruling—referred to as “Lin II”—stems from an initial tax evasion case referred by the Oradea Court of Appeal. The CJUE clarified that domestic courts must ignore national standards of “lex mitior” (the more favorable law) when those standards prevent the effective punishment of serious fraud. Under the CJUE’s definition, any fraud impacting EU financial interests exceeding 50,000 euros is automatically considered “serious,” regardless of the actual damage to the EU budget.
The Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice, led by Lia Savonea, maintained in a public statement that it has “always applied European law in good faith.” The High Court argued that it interpreted the principle of legality through the lens of the European Convention on Human Rights, asserting that it views European law as a coherent system where national constitutional values and EU jurisprudence must exist in a “permanent judicial dialogue.”
Did you know?
According to data from the Rejust jurisprudence portal, between 2022 and 2025, Romanian courts issued many decisions to terminate criminal proceedings, with the statute of limitations cited as the reason in a significant number of those cases.
The Financial Impact of Prescribed Cases
The closure of thousands of criminal files has resulted in significant financial losses for the state. The National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) reported earlier this year that the total value of damages in these closed cases reached 896.312.705 de lei, or nearly 200 million euros. While the CJUE ruling establishes a new precedent for future cases, it does not retroactively reverse the thousands of criminal cases already closed due to the statute of limitations.
Comparing the Scope of Impunity
The legal tension centers on the interpretation of the 2018 and 2022 Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) decisions. These decisions invalidated national provisions on the interruption of the statute of limitations, creating a four-year window where Romanian law lacked an effective mechanism to pause the clock on criminal liability. The CJUE explicitly noted that the High Court’s 2022 decision to extend this “void” to crimes committed between 2014 and 2018 created a “systemic risk of impunity.”
Future Trends in EU-National Judicial Relations
Frequently Asked Questions
- Does the CJUE ruling reopen closed cases? No. The decision does not affect cases that were already finalized due to the statute of limitations.
- What defines “serious fraud” under this ruling? Any fraud affecting EU financial interests totaling more than 50,000 euros is automatically classified as “serious.”
- Why did the Romanian High Court ignore the 2023 ruling? The High Court stated it was balancing European law with the principle of legality and the prohibition of “lex tertia,” arguing that it sought to protect fundamental rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Stay informed on the evolution of judicial standards in Romania by subscribing to our legal newsletter. Have thoughts on the balance between national law and EU mandates? Join the conversation in the comments section below.
Related reading
