Daniel Mihail Sandru, Constantin-Mihai Banu, Dragos Calin, The Preliminary Reference in the Jipa Case and the Case Law of Romanian Courts on the Restriction on the Free Movement of Persons, European Public Law, Vol. 18, No. 4, 2012.
The principles of EU law concerning the direct effect and primacy created major difficulties for the Romanian judges while interpreting inconsistent national legislation (adopted prior to the EU accession) and giving effect on national ground to the European rules on free movement of persons. The preliminary ruling in Jipa case clarified that the freedom of movement may be limited by Member States, but only for the purpose of ensuring the fundamental interests of the society and fully considering the personal conduct of the national involved and the principle of proportionality. Nevertheless, it is for the national courts to decide whether all these requirements are met. As we shall see, all subsequent Romanian case law concerning the freedom of movement sought to keep up with the European primary and secondary legislation, as well as with the ECJ thereof interpretation.
Elspeth Guild, Steve Peers, Jonathan Tomkin, The EU Citizenship Directive. A Commentary, Oxford University Press, 2014, p. 331.
Mihai Banu, Accesul la dosarul cauzei în contextul unei măsuri de refuz al intrării pe teritoriul statului român privind un cetăţean al Uniunii Europene. Pornind de la o hotărâre a Curţii de Apel Bucureşti, Curierul Judiciar, 4/2015, p. 229.
Gabriela A. Oanţă, The Arrival of Romanian Cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union, în vol. Rolul Europei într-o societate polarizată: Conferinţa Internaţională: Bucuresti, 9-10 mai 2014 / org. de Universitatea Titu Maiorescu, Asociaţia Română de Drept şi Afaceri Europene. – Bucuresti: Editura Hamangiu, 2014, p. 71.