I. EDITORIAL – LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE SIMPLIFIED REGISTRY INFORMATION SYSTEM AND THE UNIFIED BUILDING SERVICE; THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN AND CONSUMER PROTECTIONS IN THE PURCHASE OF CREDIT-RELATED INSURANCE
The month of April was characterized, in legislative terms, by the publication of Decree-Law no. 87/2026, of April 15, amending the legal framework governing the simplified land registry information system and the Unified Building Service, as well as the publication of Law no. 14/2026, of April 27, which strengthens the right to be forgotten and consumer protections when entering into credit-related insurance contracts, amending Law no. 75/2021, of November 18, Decree-Law no. 74-A/2017, of June 23, and Decree-Law no. 384/2007, of November 19.
In this regard, the following legislation is also worth highlighting:
- Law no. 12-A/2026, of April 15, which ensures the implementation, within the domestic legal system, of the Digital Services Regulation, amends Decree-Law no. 7/2004, of January 7 and the Law on the Organisation of the Judicial System, and repeals Decree-Law no. 20-B/2024, of February 16;
- Law no. 13/2026, of April 16, which authorizes the Government to amend the Investment Tax Code, extending the scheme for the tax incentive system for business research and development II (SIFIDE II) until 2026 and repealing the possibility of its indirect application through investment funds;
- Resolution of the Council of Ministers no. 75-A/2026, of April 27, which approves the National Strategy for Occupational Safety and Health 2026–2027;
- Rectification Statement no. 14-A/2026/1, of April 29, amending Council of Ministers Resolution no. 75-A/2026, of April 27, published in the Diário da República, 1st series, no. 81, Supplement, of April 27, 2026, approving the National Strategy for Occupational Safety and Health 2026–2027;
- Decree-Law no. 94/2026, of April 30, amending Decree-Law no. 62/2020, of August 28, which establishes the organisation and operation of the National Gas System and its legal framework, and partially transposes Directive (EU) 2024/1788 and Directive (EU) 2023/1791, on common rules for the internal markets in renewable gas, natural gas, hydrogen and energy efficiency.
Within the scope of case law, we highlight the Constitutional Court Ruling no. 366/2026, of April 21, Case no. 145/2025, in which it pronounced: “a) to declare unconstitutional the provision of Article 72(10) of the Personal Income Tax Code, as amended by Law No 3/2019 of 9 January, in so far as it refers to an administrative regulation for the primary definition of high value-added activities of a scientific, artistic or technical nature which generate category B income subject, when received by non-habitual residents, to taxation at the special rate provided for in that same legal provision, for breach of Articles 103(2) and 112(5) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic; b) to declare unconstitutional the provision of point I of the Annex to Ordinance No 12/2010 of 7 January, as amended by Article 2 of Ordinance No 230/2019 of 23 July, in so far as it provides that, for the purposes of applying the special rate provided for in Article 72(10) of the Personal Income Tax Code, defines the activities of directors of administrative and commercial services as high value-added activities of a scientific, artistic or technical nature, on the grounds of a breach of Articles 103(2) and 165(1)(i) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic; c) dismiss the appeal.”.
Finally, in the scope of Miscellaneous, we highlight that the Minister for Justice, Rita Alarcão Júdice, received João Negrão, Executive Director of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), in an audience dedicated to strengthening European cooperation on intellectual property matters; the meeting was also attended by the Deputy Secretary of State for Justice, Gonçalo Cunha Pires. These meetings form part of the strategy to deepen cooperation between the EUIPO and the Member States of the European Union, one of the central pillars of the EUIPO’s Strategic Plan 2030.
II. LEGISLATION
Decree-Law no. 81/2026, of April 6: It reorganises the Directorate-General for Social Security and establishes the Directorate-General for Solidarity and Social Security.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/06600/0000200008.pdf
Decree-Law no. 82/2026, of April 7: Renames and regulates the Mobility and Transport Fund.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/06700/0000300013.pdf
Resolution of the Council of Ministers no. 68/2026, of April 7: Authorises the rescheduling of the multi-annual commitments authorised by Council of Ministers Resolution No 169/2019 of 30 September, which approves a multi-annual financial commitment totalling €50,000,000, equivalent to 50% of the initial capital of the Fund of Funds for Internationalisation.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/06700/0002100021.pdf
Ordinance no. 154-A/2026/1, of April 8: Proceeds to the third amendment to the Regulations of the “Financial Instrument for Innovation and Competitiveness” Incentive Scheme, approved by Ordinance no. 286/2025/1, of August 14.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/06801/0000200010.pdf
Resolution of the Council of Ministers no. 69-A/2026, of April 9: It sets out the terms for the financing and implementation of the support measures provided for in Resolution of the Council of Ministers no. 17-A/2026, of February 3.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/06901/0000200002.pdf
Decree-Law no. 84/2026, of April 13: Pursuant to the authorisation granted by Law no. 2/2026, of January 6, it approves a legal framework governing certain aspects of the organisation of working time for mobile employees in road transport activities and transposes several directives into national law.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07100/0000200037.pdf
Law no. 12/2026, of April 14: First amendment, following parliamentary consideration, to Decree-Law no. 31-C/2026, of February 5, establishing a simplified social support and lay-off scheme for areas affected by Storm «Kristin».
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07200/0000200003.pdf
Ordinance no. 158-A/2026/1, of April 14: Proceeds to the third amendment of Ordinance no. 138-C/2021, of June 30, which sets out the template and additional requirements that applications for funding under the Housing Access Support Programme and the National Fund for Emergency and Temporary Accommodation must comply with.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07201/0000200005.pdf
Rectification Statetement no. 13-A/2026/1, of April 14: Amends Decree-Law no. 40-A/2026, of February 13, which establishes an exceptional and temporary regime for administrative and financial simplification aimed at the reconstruction and rehabilitation of heritage sites and infrastructure located in the municipalities affected by the storm «Kristin».
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07202/0000200004.pdf
Decree-Law no. 87/2026, of April 15: Amends the legal framework governing the simplified land registry information system and the Unified Building Service.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07300/0000500022.pdf
Law no. 12-A/2026, of April 15: It ensures the implementation, within the domestic legal system, of the Digital Services Regulation, amends Decree-Law no. 7/2004, of January 7 and the Law on the Organisation of the Judicial System, and revokes Decree-Law no. 20-B/2024, of February 16.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07301/0000200025.pdf
Law no. 13/2026, of April 16: Authorises the Government to amend the Investment Tax Code, extending the scheme for the tax incentive system for business research and development II (SIFIDE II) until 2026 and repealing the possibility of its indirect application through investment funds.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07400/0000400005.pdf
Ordinance no. 181/2026/1, of April 21: Proceeds with the first amendment to Ordinance no. 86-A/2026/1, of February 20, which regulates the exceptional support measures provided for in Council of Ministers Resolution no. 17-A/2026, of February 3, establishing the scheme for financial support arising from the state of emergency caused by Storm «Kristin», in accordance with Annex I, point (a)(ii), and Chapter III of Annex II.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/07700/0000300004.pdf
Law no. 14/2026, of April 27: It strengthens the right to be forgotten and consumer protection when entering into credit-related insurance policies, by amending Law no. 75/2021, of November 18, Decree-Law no. 74-A/2017, of June 23, and Decree-Law no. 384/2007, of November 19.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/08100/0000300006.pdf
Resolution of the Council of Ministers no. 75-A/2026, of April 27: Approves the National Strategy for Occupational Safety and Health 2026–2027.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/08101/0000200014.pdf
Rectification Statement no. 14-A/2026/1, of April 29: Amends Resolution of the Council of Ministers no. 75-A/2026 of April 27, published in the Diário da República, 1st series, no. 81, supplement, of 27 April 2026, which approves the National Strategy for Occupational Safety and Health 2026–2027.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/08302/0000200002.pdf
Decree-Law no. 94/2026, of April 30: Amends Decree-Law no. 62/2020, of August 28, which establishes the organisation and operation of the National Gas System and its legal framework, and partially transposes Directive (EU) 2024/1788 and Directive (EU) 2023/1791, relating to common rules for the internal markets in renewable gas, natural gas, hydrogen and energy efficiency.
https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2026/04/08400/0000500008.pdf
III. CASE-LAW
III.1. Court of Justice of the European Union
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), of April 16, Cases no. C-672/23 and C-673/23: Reference for a preliminary ruling. Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters. Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012. Special jurisdiction. Article 8(1). Multiple defendants. Claims so closely connected that there is an interest in hearing and determining them together. Concept of ‘so closely connected’. Concept of “anchor defendant”. Infringement of Article 101 TFEU. Directive 2014/104/EU. Compensation for damage caused by a cartel. Concept of an undertaking. Liability of the parent company and a subsidiary. Commission decision. Decision of a national competition authority. Damage occurring outside the European Economic Area (EEA).
Summary:
“1. Article 8(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, must be interpreted as meaning that, on the one hand, an action brought against a defendant who serves as the anchor for establishing the jurisdiction of the court seised and who has not been identified as liable for an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992 found by the European Commission or a national competition authority and, on the other hand, actions brought against companies in respect of which there are serious indications that they belong to undertakings, within the meaning of EU competition law, to which that infringement has been attributed, may be ‘so closely connected’ for the purposes of that provision.
2. Article 8(1) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to assess whether the claims brought against several defendants are ‘so closely connected’ within the meaning of that provision, the predictability for the co-defendant of being sued in the court of the defendant who serves as the anchor for establishing the jurisdiction of the court seised does not constitute an independent criterion, but must be taken into consideration, as a general principle, in the application of the special rule on jurisdiction laid down in that provision.
3. Article 8(1) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to assess whether the claims brought against several defendants are ‘so closely connected’ within the meaning of that provision, the prospects of success of the claim against the defendant who serves as the anchor for establishing the jurisdiction of the court seised should not be taken into account. However, it may be taken into account as an indication that the claimant has not artificially created the conditions for the application of that provision. The fact that the damage alleged in a claim for damages for cartel infringement before a court of a Member State occurred outside the EEA does not, in itself, imply, in the context of verifying the international jurisdiction of that court, that the claim must be classified as manifestly unfounded.
4. Article 8(1) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that it determines both the international jurisdiction and the territorial jurisdiction of the court of a Member State in whose jurisdiction the defendant who serves as the anchor for establishing the jurisdiction of the court seised is domiciled.
5. Article 8(1) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as not precluding a court of a Member State, initially seised on the basis of that provision, but which considers that it does not have territorial jurisdiction to hear the action brought against the defendant who serves as the anchor for establishing the jurisdiction of the court seised, to decline jurisdiction in favour of another court of the same Member State with jurisdiction to hear the action, provided that such a decline of jurisdiction is in accordance with national rules of procedure and does not undermine the effectiveness of that regulation.”
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:62023CJ0672
III.2. Constitutional Court
Constitutional Court Ruling no. 347/2026, of April 7, Case no. 770/2025:
“a) Not to declare unconstitutional Article 2189(b) of the Civil Code, Article 1601(b) of the Civil Code, Article 2(b) of Law No 7/2001 of 11 May, Article 6(2) of Law No. 32/2006 of 26 July, Article 4(1) of Decree-Law No. 272/2001 of 13 October, and Article 9(1) and (2) of Law No. 35/2023 of 21 July (having regard to Articles 54(a) and 55 of Law No. 35/2023 of 21 July), in conjunction with Article 147(1) and (2) of the Civil Code, for legally admitting legal incapacity to make a will, a diriment impediment, an impediment to the attribution of rights or benefits during life or upon death based on a civil partnership, preventing recourse to medically assisted reproduction techniques, legal incapacity to accept or reject gifts in one’s favour, and incapacity to exercise the personal rights enshrined in the Mental Health Act on account of a disability;;
b) Not to declare unconstitutional Article 2189(b) of the Civil Code, Article 1601(b) of the Civil Code, Article 2(b) of Law No. 7/2001 of 11 May, Article 6(2) of Law No. 32/2006 of 26 July, Article 4(1) of Decree-Law No. 272/2001 of 13 October, Article 9(1) and (2) of Law No. 35/2023 of 21 July (having regard to Articles 54(a) and 55 of Law No. 35/2023 of 21 July), in conjunction with Article 147(1) of the Civil Code, for permitting the restriction of personal rights to make a will, to move, to establish domicile and residence, and to consent to or refuse medical treatment or other health therapies; and, consequently,
c) To uphold the appeal, ordering the reversal of the contested decision in accordance with the previous ruling of non-unconstitutionality.”.
https://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20260347.html
Constitutional Court Ruling no. 366/2026, of April 21, Case no. 145/2025:
“a) to declare unconstitutional the provision of Article 72(10) of the Personal Income Tax Code, as amended by Law No 3/2019 of 9 January, in so far as it refers to an administrative regulation for the primary definition of high value-added activities of a scientific, artistic or technical nature which generate category B income subject, when received by non-habitual residents, to taxation at the special rate provided for in that same legal provision, for breach of Articles 103(2) and 112(5) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic;
b) to declare unconstitutional the provision of point I of the Annex to Ordinance No 12/2010 of 7 January, as amended by Article 2 of Ordinance No 230/2019 of 23 July, in so far as it provides that, for the purposes of applying the special rate provided for in Article 72(10) of the Personal Income Tax Code, defines the activities of directors of administrative and commercial services as high value-added activities of a scientific, artistic or technical nature, on the grounds of a breach of Articles 103(2) and 165(1)(i) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic;
c) dismiss the appeal.”.
https://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20260366.html
III.3. Judicial Courts
Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice, of April 8, Case no. 7576/23.2T8LSB.L1.S1: Law applicable to the employment agreement. Applicable law. Employment agreement.
Summary:
“I – The choice of applicable law by the parties to a contract may be implied, but it must “be clearly evident from the terms of the contract or the circumstances of the case”.
II – Even if it can be established that the parties have impliedly chosen a particular law as the law applicable to the employment agreement, this does not relieve the court of the duty to determine which law would be applicable in the absence of such a choice, therefore “this choice cannot, however, have the effect of depriving the employee of the protection afforded by provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement, under the law which, in the absence of a choice, would be applicable pursuant to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of this Article” (Article 8(1) of the Regulation).
III – In the specific case at hand, taking into account, in particular, that the contract was entered into in Portugal, that the parties are Portuguese and the employee is resident in Portugal, and that “it was the defendant who processed the claimant’s remuneration and made the relevant statutory deductions in accordance with the social security and tax regime in force in Portugal”, Portuguese law would be applicable in the absence of a choice, as Portugal is the country with the closest connection to the contract (Article 8(4) of the Rome I Regulation).
IV - Consequently, in the event of an unlawful dismissal, the consequences provided for under Portuguese law must apply, as they cannot be derogated from by agreement and are more favourable to the employee than those that would result from Norwegian law, as well as holiday and Christmas allowances.”.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice, of April 16, Case no. 1319/24.0T8PRT-B.P1.S1: Mortgage. Distract. Property. Condominium. Separate Unit. Divisibility. Debt. Creditor. Debtor. Indivisibility. Quantification Criteria. Supplementary Rule.
Summary:
“I. Given that it has been established in the proceedings that the mortgage initially covered only twelve of the individual units in a building, and given that the creditor has already discharged the said mortgage in respect of five of those units, the calculation of the liability of the owner of one of the units that remains encumbered must be made by applying the percentage of that unit to the current amount of the claimant’s claim, with reference to the seven separate units that are still encumbered by the mortgage.
II. Given the recognised divisibility of a mortgage covering various units within a building and previous partial discharges, it would be illogical to take the initial value of the debt secured by the mortgage as the basis, since the amount still outstanding is currently less than the initial debt, owing to the instalment payments resulting from the recognised and effected partial discharges.
III. Since it is not the initial value of the debt that is considered, but the current value, one cannot consider the assets initially mortgaged, but rather those that remain encumbered; it must therefore be stated that the reduction in the initial debt corresponds equally to a reduction in the assets covered by the mortgage. What is relevant, therefore, is the share of each encumbered unit in relation to the currently outstanding debt”.
Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice, of April 22, Case no. 2922/22.9T8OAZ.P1.S1: Workplace Accident. Football Player. FIFA Regulations. Transfer. Liability.
Summary:
“I - Sporting activity associated with the professional game of football is of significant public interest. For this reason, the legal framework governing sport imposes specific mechanisms for the organisation and development of the activity, with a view to reconciling its economic dimension with the social role of sport.
II - These specific features have various implications, resulting in specific rules, particularly regarding the provision of services to national teams and the level of protection in the event of accidents.
III - It follows from this framework that the employer is liable for accidents occurring whilst on national team duty, which, under the entire legal framework, is performed in fulfilment of a contractual obligation imposed on the parties, as set out in Articles 11 and 13 of Law 54/2017 (RGCTPD) and in the national and international federation regulations adopted by the parties.
IV - The insurance contract by which the club transfers its liability for accidents covers accidents occurring whilst on national team duty, provided that such duty is performed within the framework of the obligations arising from the applicable legal framework.”.
Judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal, of April 14, Case no. 1969/21.7T8LSB.L1-1: Company Resolution. Exclusion of Shareholder. Minutes of the General Meeting.
Summary:
“I. Irregularities that may lead to the nullity or annulment of a corporate resolution may relate to its content (irregularities of content or substance – irregularities occurring in the resolution itself) or to the process by which it was formed (procedural irregularities – which generally occur when the process or manner of forming the resolution is flawed) – Articles 56 and 58 of the CSC.
II. The exclusion of a shareholder based on the general exclusion clause provided for in Article 242(1) of the CSC cannot be effected by a resolution of the shareholders, but requires the bringing of the relevant legal proceedings for exclusion.
III. As the minutes of the general meeting record, under items I and II of the agenda (already identified in the relevant notice of meeting), the ‘exclusion of the partner from the company (…) on the grounds of his disloyal and seriously disruptive conduct (…)’ and the ‘appointment of Dr (…) as special representative for the purposes of implementing the resolution to be adopted pursuant to the aforementioned Point One’, respectively, both of which were approved, we are faced with a resolution to exclude a member and a resolution to implement the same; these points cannot be interpreted as meaning that authorisation to bring legal proceedings for the exclusion of a member was first resolved.
IV. Correspondence exchanged between the parties prior to the general meeting does not have the power to alter the contents of the notarial minutes, nor to make interpretations that are not at least implicit in its text, and even less so to replace or alter the content of the resolution (by legally transforming or reclassifying a resolution to exclude a member into a resolution authorising legal proceedings for the exclusion of a member).
V. It is the minutes, and the minutes alone, that define what was resolved at the general meeting and the manner in which it was resolved, all the more so as it is at the meeting that the corporate will is formed and expressed.
VI. What is relevant is the moment the resolution is passed, not the moment the minutes are signed, the latter merely documenting the resolution already passed.”.
Judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal, of April 28, Case no. 5400/22.2T8LSB-A.L1-7: Condominium. Legal Entity. Representation. Injunction. Enforceable title.
Summary:
“I – The rules governing proceedings to enforce financial obligations arising from contracts with a value not exceeding €15,000 and injunctions, as approved by Decree -Law No. 269/98 of 1 September contains a special regime in relation to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure; consequently, the service of the application for an injunction must be governed by the rules laid down therein.
II – The condominium resulting from the division of a property into separate units has legal personality only in respect of legal proceedings falling within the scope of the administrator’s powers; that is to say, proceedings brought by the condominium against the administrator on grounds relating to the exercise or non-exercise of his powers, or proceedings brought by the administrator against the condominium on the basis of the exercise of those same powers.
III – Where an action may be brought by or against the condominium, in accordance with Article 12(e) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the condominium shall be represented in court by its administrator.
IV – The injunction procedure is not of a judicial nature, but gives rise to an extrajudicial enforcement order; if the notice served in that procedure is found to be invalid, the enforcement order is deemed not to have been issued, which necessitates the upholding of the defendant’s objection and the termination of the enforcement proceedings.”.
Judgment of the Coimbra Court of Appeal, of April 28, Case no. 274/25.4T8CTB.C1: Construction Contract. Termination of Contract. Litigation in Bad Faith. Penalty.
Summary:
“1. In the event of delays or defects in the construction work, given that a construction contract is a bilateral and synallagmatic contract, the client could refuse to pay the consideration - if it is not yet due (and the work has not been expressly accepted) - on this ground, until the construction is completed and the defects are rectified.
2. Once the exceptio nom adimpleti contratus has been invoked, it may only be set aside if the defaulting party claims that: the party invoking the exception is obliged to perform first and that the benefit of the time limit has not been forfeited (Articles 429 and 781 of the Civil Code); the obligation has already been performed by the opposing party or that the latter has offered simultaneous performance; and, furthermore, if there is a serious disproportion between the refused performance and the unperformed consideration, such that invoking the exception can be considered a flagrant violation of the principles of good faith.
3. The rules set out in Articles 1218 et seq. of the Civil Code regarding the rights of the client in the event of delays and defective construction do not override the general rules concerning breach of contract, in particular those relating to fundamental breach of contract, as provided for in Article 808(1) of the Civil Code, which are particularly relevant where the party entitled to performance of the work has set a strict deadline for its completion, upon the expiry of which it must be deemed to have lost interest in its performance, or where it has converted the delay into a definitive breach by means of a formal notice.
4. Where there are delays and defects in the construction carried out, and the creditor (the client) has set a deadline for its completion and the rectification of the defects, which has not been met by the contractor who has refused to rectify them, and where this deadline is essential because the client is bound by the conclusion of the final sale agreement for the building to a third party, the contract is deemed to have been validly terminated.
5. In this case, the owner of the construction is entitled to compensation for the losses suffered as a result of the failure to complete the construction and the consequent breach of the preliminary agreement for the sale of the pavilions to be built, as well as to reimbursement of the costs incurred in completing the construction and rectifying the defects.
6. The client is not in default regarding payment of the final contract price where the construction has not been completed and is defective, having regard to the provision of Article 1211 of the Civil Code.
7. A party acts in bad faith if it distorts the facts – namely, that the invoices it issued were accepted and included in R.’s accounts – whilst omitting other facts – such as their return, the lack of acceptance of the constrction and of an inspection, and the existing dispute between the two parties – which are relevant to the decision of the case (subparagraph b) of paragraph 2 of Article 542 of the Code of Civil Procedure), as this influences the content of the decision to be handed down.
8. The quantification of the amount of the fine must comply with the following criteria: the degree of culpability of the party, the effects of the conduct in bad faith on the conduct of the proceedings and on the correct decision of the case, as well as the financial situation of the party and the impact that the fine will have on their assets.”.
Judgment of the Coimbra Court of Appeal, of April 15, Case no. 51/21.1GAMMV.C1: Crime of Abuse of Trust. Undivided Inheritance. Error of Judgment. Perfectibility of the Crime.
Summary:
“1. The constituent elements of the crime of breach of trust, as provided for and punishable under Article 205 of the Penal Code, are the handing over of property under a title that does not transfer ownership and the perpetrator’s misappropriation of that property; in addition to these objective elements, intent is required as a subjective element.
2. An undivided inheritance constitutes an autonomous estate which is not to be confused with the estate of the heirs.
3. As the heir of her deceased mother, the defendant, until the assets are distributed, is entitled only in the abstract to a share of the inheritance and not to a specific asset that may form part of it.
4. In this case, the presumption (Article 516 of the Civil Code) that, in joint and several accounts, each account holder owns an equal share of the funds deposited therein has also been rebutted, as it has been established that the money deposited into the current account came from the savings of both the defendant’s parents and from the pensions of her father and brother, and that her inclusion in that capacity, alongside her siblings, was at the behest of their father with the intention that they might manage the account should he be unable to do so.
5. The transfer of part of the money deposited in that account to another account held solely in the defendant’s name, to which her father and brothers had no access, constitutes an external act that points to an intention to appropriate that sum.
6. And this intention is further reinforced by the fact that, despite a criminal complaint having been filed against her, she did not return the sum in question, and furthermore, her father was forced to apply for a protective order to freeze the account in order to safeguard the funds.
7. Thus, having been established that the said sum of money became part of the defendant’s assets as a result of an act she committed freely, voluntarily and knowingly, with the specific intention of taking possession of the property in question whilst aware that it did not belong to her, the defendant has committed the offence of breach of trust, as provided for and punishable under Article 205 of the Penal Code.”.
III.4. Administrative and Tax Courts
Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court, of April 15, Case no. 01278/14.8BELRS: VAT. Deduction.
Summary:
“A taxable person must be granted the right to deduct VAT if it has been established that there is a ‘direct and immediate link’ between the goods or services acquired and the taxable person’s economic activity as a whole, with the investment expenditure (expenditure incurred by a taxable person to carry out future transactions giving rise to a right of deduction) one of the situations in which the TDUE has ruled that the right to such a deduction must be recognised.”.
Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court, of April 29, Case no. 0113/25.6BALSB: Appeal for the Harmonisation of Case Law. Withholding Tax. Illegality. Commencement Date. Payment. Compensatory interest.
Summary:
“In the event of unlawful withholding tax and where the tax assessment in question is subject to an administrative challenge (e.g. an internal appeal), the error becomes attributable to the Tax Authority following the rejection of the internal appeal procedure, whether actual or presumed (whichever occurs first), with that date serving as the starting point for calculating the compensatory interest payable to the taxpayer, pursuant to Article 43(1) and (3) of the General Tax Law.”.
IV. BRIEFS
IV.1. DOCTRINE
IV.1.1. Monographs and Periodicals
Paulo Ramirez, Direito Comercial, Almedina, April 2026.
M. Sérvulo Correia, Francisco Paes Marques, Noções de Direito Administrativo - Volume I, Almedina, April 2026.
Nuno Castro Marques, Paulo Vila Maior, Manual de Direito Europeu, Almedina, April 2026.
Paulo Câmara, Manual de Direito dos Valores Mobiliários, Almedina, April 2026.
António Barreto Menezes Cordeiro, Tratado de Direito Civil XV - Direito da Família (1ª Parte): Antropologia, História, Direito Comparado, Fontes, Príncipios e Temas Controversos, Almedina, April 2026.
Pedro Matias Pereira, A Resolução do Contrato Público com Fundamento em Invalidade, Almedina, April 2026.
IV.1.2. Generic Guidelines & Cia
Circular Letter no. 20292/2026, of April 17, by Order of the Sub-Director General of the Personal Income Tax Area
Subject: Tax-Relevant Deficiency – Review of the Tax Authority’s Position.
IV.2. Miscellaneous
IV.2.1. Bulletin of Labour and Employment
Extension Ordinance, BTE no. 16, of April 29: Order extending the collective agreement between the Portuguese Association of Paper and Board Manufacturers (FAPEL) and the Union of Industries and Related Sectors (SINDEQ) and others.
Extension Ordinance, BTE no. 16, of April 29: Ordinance extending the amendments to the collective agreement between the National Association of Energy, Fuel, Service Station, Car Park and Car Wash Retailers (ANAREC) and the Portuguese Federation of Trade, Office and Service Sector Trade Unions (FEPCES) and others.
Collective Agreement, BTE no. 16, of April 29: Collective agreement between the National Association of Pharmacies (ANF) and SINPROFARM (National Union of Pharmacy Professionals) – Salary adjustments and other matters.
Company Agreement, BTE no. 16, of April 29: Company agreement between Europ Assistance SA – Portuguese Branch and the National Union of Insurance and Related Professionals (SINAPSA) – Salary adjustments and other matters.
Company Agreement, BTE no. 16, of April 29: Company agreement between Ponto Seguro - Mediação de Seguros, SA and the National Union of Insurance and Related Professionals (SINAPSA) and another party – Salary adjustments and other matters.
IV.2.2. Economics, Finance and Taxation
The Council of Ministers, meeting on April 6, 2026, has approved a Legislative Proposal that temporarily amends the legal framework governing the Tax on Petroleum Products (ISP), lowering the minimum tax thresholds. This amendment enables the Government to continue reducing the ISP periodically and temporarily by returning the additional VAT revenue resulting from recent fuel price increases following the conflict in the Middle East.
https://portugal.gov.pt/gc25/governo/comunicados-do-conselho-de-ministros/720
The Council of Ministers, meeting on April 9, 2026, approved a Legislative Proposal on the Organisation and Procedure of the Court of Auditors (TdC), a far-reaching reform designed to modernise the functioning of the body responsible for auditing public accounts, as well as a Council of Ministers resolution approving the creation of the Portugal Energy Resilience Scheme, a financial support scheme aimed at helping businesses specifically affected by the sharp rise in energy costs caused by the conflict in the Middle East.
https://portugal.gov.pt/gc25/governo/comunicados-do-conselho-de-ministros/721
The Council of Ministers, meeting on April 16, 2026, approved, in general terms and for consultation, a Decree-Law amending the Public Contracts Code (PCC), which sets out the legal framework for public procurement in Portugal. This revision seeks to address identified constraints, notably excessive bureaucracy, the slowness of procedures and the difficulty in ensuring the swift implementation of public investment. It also approved the Decree-Law implementing the State Budget for 2026, which sets out the rules necessary for the application of the State Budget Law and ensures adequate control of budget implementation throughout the year.
IV.2.3. Industrial Property
On April 14, Provisional statistics on applications for and grants of Industrial Property Rights (IPR), updated to March 2026, have been published. In the first three months of 2026, 377 applications for national patents were filed (an increase on the 241 applications filed in the same period the previous year). As regards grants, 36 national inventions were granted between January and March 2026, compared with 73 granted between January and March 2025, representing a decrease of 50.7%. These figures include applications for Patents, Utility Models, Supplementary Protection Certificates and International Applications in the national phase.
https://inpi.justica.gov.pt/Noticias-do-INPI/Direitos-de-Propriedade-Industrial-janeiro-a-marco-2026
On April 29, the Minister for Justice, Rita Alarcão Júdice, received João Negrão, Executive Director of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), in an audience dedicated to strengthening European cooperation on intellectual property matters; the meeting was also attended by the Deputy Secretary of State for Justice, Gonçalo Cunha Pires. These meetings form part of the strategy to deepen cooperation between the EUIPO and the Member States of the European Union, one of the central pillars of the EUIPO’s Strategic Plan 2030.
On April 30, around 100 participants, including various officials from judicial authorities, Industrial Property Officers and other professionals from the fields of intellectual property (IP) and the judiciary, attended the event marking World Intellectual Property Day, which was dedicated to artificial intelligence (AI) and co-organised by the Lisbon Court of Appeal (TRL) and the INPI.
Legal notice:
This publication was prepared by Mouteira Guerreiro, Rosa Amaral & Associados, Sociedade de Advogados, SP RL (“MGRA”), which holds all the intellectual property rights inherent to it. In particular, its content is not intended to be, nor should it be understood as, replacement of the professional legal advice required for the taking of decisions and resolution of specific cases, nor does it constitute, is deemed to or will constitute MGRA in any obligation of any nature. The copying, alteration, reproduction, distribution, circulation and inclusion in other documents or quotations are prohibited unless previously authorized by . Our law firm expressly disclaims all liability for any possible damages caused by actions taken or not taken based on any or all the contents of this publication. See our terms and conditions and privacy policy. For any further questions or to subscribe please contact e-legal@mgra.pt.
Automatic translation disclaimer:
The original text of this publication is the Portuguese version. Translation into languages other than Portuguese is intended to assist the non-English-reading public. We provide the translation through the use of professional automated translation software, which is not perfect nor it can replace the human factor . As a result, some content may not be accurately translated due to both the limitations of the translation software state of the art and possible nuances in translating to a foreign language.
No warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, is made as to the accuracy, reliability, or correctness of any translation made from Portuguese into any other language. Any discrepancies or differences created in the translation are not binding and have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement purposes.
MGRA disclaims and will not accept any liability for damages or losses of any kind arising out of, or in connection with, the use or performance of the translated information, including but not limited to, damages or losses caused by reliance upon the accuracy of any such information.
Refer to