[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
4. Gilbert, Eleanor. “Supremacy and Direct Effect: Necessary Measures?” North East Law Review 5 (2017): 11–15.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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
]Search in Google Scholar
[
8. Karayigit, Mustafa T. “Are Directives Directly Applicable?” Ankara Avrupa Calismalari Dergisi 15, no. 2 (2016): 59–95.10.1501/Avraras_0000000235
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. Klimek, Libor. European Arrest Warrant. London: Springer, 2015.10.1007/978-3-319-07338-5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. Miettinen, Samuli. Criminal Law and Policy in the European Union. London and New York: Routledge, 2014.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Mitsilegas, Valsamis. EU Criminal Law. Oxford and Portland, OR: Bloomsbury, 2009.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Samulytė-Mamontovė, Aistė. “Principle of Legal Certainty and (In)direct Effect of Directives.” Social Transformations in Contemporary Society 2 (2014): 57–68.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Vlaicu, Anca-Magda. “The Direct Effect of Treaty Provisions.” Lex et Scientia International Journal 16 (2009): 235–249.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
1. A.G., M.P. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-281-489.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
2. Alcoa Trasformazioni v Commission. CJEU, C-194/09, ECLI:EU:C:2011:497.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
3. Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Official Journal C 202, 7.6.2016, P. 1-388.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
5. Criminal Code of Republic of Lithuania. Official Gazette, 2000, no. 89-2741.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
6. D.L. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2014, no. 2K-389.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. E.J. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-199-648.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. Edgar Babanov. CJEU, C-207/08, ECLI:EU:C:2008:407.10.1162/jcws.2008.10.3.207
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Fibre Hemp Law of the Republic of Lithuania. Official Gazette, 2013, no. 61-3025.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
12. Flaminio Costa v E.N.E.L. CJEU. Case 6-64, ECLI:EU:C:1964.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Franz Grad v Finanzamt Traunstein. CJEU, C-9/70, ECLI:EU:C:1970:78.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
14. J.V., A.Z. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-290-489.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
15. K.J. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019, no. 2K-278-697.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Kolpinghuis Nijmegen BV. CJEU, C-80/86, ECLI:EU:C:1987:431.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
17. Maria Pupino. CJEU, C-105/03, ECLI:EU:C:2005:386.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
18. M.A.S. and M.B. CJEU, C-42/17, ECLI:EU:C:2017:936.10.1080/14693062.2017.1360173
]Search in Google Scholar
[
19. M.H. Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching). CJEU, C-152/84, ECLI:EU:C:1986:84.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
20. M.M. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2016, no. 2K-52-942.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
21. NV Algemene Transporten Expeditie Onderneming van Gend & Loos v Netherlands Inland Revenue Administration. CJEU, C-26/62, ECLI:EU:C:1963.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
22. P.Ž. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2014, no. 2K- 317.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
23. R.K. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2007, no. 2K-531.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
24. S.S., S.G., R.P. v State. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2012, no. 2K-332.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
25. Salvatore Grimaldi v Fonds des maladies professionnelles. CJEU, C-322/88, ECLI:EU:C:1989:646.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
26. State v A.L. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2015, no. 2K-242-511.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
27. State v A.R. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2007, no. 2K- 319.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
28. State v J.A.G. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2010, no. 2K-383.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
29. State v R.N. Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania, 2011, no. 2K-239.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
30. Tarrico and Others. CJEU, C-105/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:555.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
31. Tullio Ratti. CJEU, C-148/78, ECLI:EU:C:1979:110.10.1093/oxfordjournals.afraf.a097075
]Search in Google Scholar
[
32. Yvonne van Duyn v Home Office. CJEU, C-41/74, ECLI:EU:C:1974:133.
]Search in Google Scholar
