Abstract: The study has as departure point a recent jurisprudential checkpoint from the Court of Justice of the European Union. The interest of the theme is accentuated by the existence of a previous decision of the Romanian Constitutional Court in the same matter. The two judicial approaches allow a general interrogation on the notion and purpose of financial corrections in European funds contracts. The main division is between ”measures”, who have recuperatory function and assure the equilibrium of the European budget and ”sanctions”, who have punitive purpose. Subsequently, the application in time of „corrective” legislation raises a difference in jurisprudential accents. A series of normative modifications in a field qualified as non-penal, has altered the procedures for identifying and quashing contractual irregularities. The legal bound between the financing national organisms (managing European funds) and the financial beneficiaries is ground for different procedures applicable at different moments in time. The general key of analysis in determining of a retroactive effect is in place could be the „punitive” nature of the procedures. The study tries to underline similarities and differences between the two jurisprudential visions and to ensure a unitary perspective for further case-law.

Keywords: financial corrections, European fund contracts, measures, sanctions