III.CASE- LAW
III.1. Court of Justice of the European Union

Judgment of the Court of October 24, Case C‑602/17: Reference for a preliminary ruling. Freedom of movement for workers. Income received in a Member State other than the Member State of residence. Bilateral convention for the avoidance of double taxation. Allocation of powers of taxation. Member State of residence’s power to tax. Connecting factors.
Summary: “Article 45 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude a tax scheme of a Member State under a tax convention for the avoidance of double taxation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which makes the exemption of the income of a resident which arises in another Member State and relates to employment in that State subject to the condition that the activity in respect of which the income is paid is actually performed in that State.”
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=206982&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=798043 

Judgment of the Court of October 25, Case C‑528/17: Reference for a preliminary ruling. Value added tax (VAT). Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 143(1)(d). Exemption from import VAT. Importation followed by an intra-Community supply. Risk of tax evasion. Good faith of the taxable importer and supplier. Assessment. Duty of care of the taxable importer and supplier.
Summary: “Article 143(1)(d) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2009/69/EC of 25 June 2009, must be interpreted to the effect that, in circumstances where the taxable importer and supplier benefitted from an exemption from import value added tax on the basis of an authorisation issued after a prior examination by the competent customs authorities in the light of the evidence provided by that taxable person, the latter is not required to pay value added tax after the event where it is revealed, during a subsequent examination, that the substantive conditions for the exemption had not been met, except where it is established, in the light of objective evidence, that that taxable person knew, or should have known, that the supplies subsequent to the imports at issue were involved in fraud committed by the customer and that he did not take all reasonable steps in his power to avoid that fraud, which is a matter for the referring court to determine.”
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=207005&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=798043

III.2. Constitutional Court

Judgment of the Constitutional Court No. 367/2018 of October 17: Declares the unconstitutionality, with general binding force, of the norms in Article 2 (1), Article 3 (2) and Article 4 ( 2) of the Regulation of the Municipal Tax of Civil Protection of Vila Nova de Gaia, for violation of the provisions of Article 103 (2) and Article 165 (1) (i) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic.
https://data.dre.pt/eli/actconst/367/2018/10/17/p/dre/pt/html

Judgment of the Constitutional Court No. 420/2018 of October 17: Pronounced for the unconstitutionality of the norm contained in Article 2 of the Regional Legislative Decree entitled “Bylaws of the Fireman of the Autonomous Region of Madeira”, approved by the Legislative Assembly of the Autonomous Region of Madeira, in a plenary session on July 5, 2018, which was sent to the Representative of the Republic for the Autonomous Region of Madeira for signature as a regional legislative decree, to the extent that, by amending the wording of Article 6 of the Regional Legislative Decree No. 21/2010 / M of August 20, amended by Regional Legislative Decree No. 12/2016 / M, of March 10, provides for the addition of the rights defined in Article 5 of Decree- Law No. 241/2007, of June 21, the right to social tariffs on water, directly and undeniably, regarding firefighters in the framework of assets of the Autonomous Region of Madeira.
https://data.dre.pt/eli/actconst/420/2018/10/17/p/dre/pt/html

III.3. Courts of Justice

Judgment of the Court of Appeal of Lisbon of October 4, Case No. 1690 / 10.1TBSCR-B. L1-2: Credit Claim. Right to withhold.
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/6bb8755f7fd8cda68025832e004af98d?OpenDocument

Judgment of the Court of Appeal of Guimarães of October 4, Case No. 6029 / 17. 2T8GMR.G1: International jurisdiction. Member States of the European Union. Place of fulfilment. Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012.
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrg.nsf/86c25a698e4e7cb7802579ec004d3832/acb560ded316526e8025832f00305a14?OpenDocument

Judgment of the Court of Appeal of Porto of October 10, Case 372 / 16. 5T9AGD.P1: Crime of falsity of testimony.
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrp.nsf/56a6e7121657f91e80257cda00381fdf/3d80554852209aba8025832f0054b671?OpenDocument

Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice No. 4/2018 of October 24, Case No. 319 / 16. 9GBPNF.P1-B.S1: Appeal for establishing case-law.
https://data.dre.pt/eli/acstj/4/2018/10/24/p/dre/pt/html

Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice No. 5/2018 of October 30, Case No. 100/12.4EALSB.G1-A. S1: Extraordinary appeal for establishing case-law.

III.4. Administrative and Tax Courts

Judgment of the South-Central Administrative Court of October 11, Case No. 107 / 17.5BESNT: Opposition to Tax Execution. Expiry of the right of action. Quote.
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtca.nsf/170589492546a7fb802575c3004c6d7d/19e702ff089ea5d1802583230054ba5f?OpenDocument

Judgment of the South-Central Administrative Court of October 11, Case No. 1594 / 09.0BELRA: IRC. False invoice. Provide evidence. Expiry of liquidation.
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtca.nsf/170589492546a7fb802575c3004c6d7d/fd74f2212677e05f8025832e00350178?OpenDocument