PORTUGAL Trends and Developments Contributed by: José Luís da Cruz Vilaça and Mariana Tavares, Antas da Cunha Ecija
porary-employment agencies from recruiting each other’s workers. The decision is currently under appeal before the TCRS. • Beverage industry ( ongoing ): Following a leniency application, the AdC has issued a Statement of Objections to companies in the beverage sector concerning alleged no-poaching agreements. The AdC stated that further enforcement action in this area may follow. Private Enforcement and Collective Litigation: A Maturing, Multi-Sector Docket The private enforcement landscape in Portugal has continued to evolve, with collective and follow-on actions becoming a more established feature of anti - trust litigation. Litigation has expanded beyond the retail sector to a broader range of industries, including banking, automotive, pharmaceuticals and consumer goods. Several claims have followed AdC infringe - ment decisions, while others have been brought on a standalone basis, demonstrating the growing diversity of private antitrust litigation in Portugal. Since 2020, more than 100 follow-on actions have been brought before the TCRS. Portugal’s opt-out col - lective action framework has facilitated this growth. The framework does not require a separate certifi - cation stage, court fees are generally payable only following judgment, and the rules limit the potential adverse costs exposure of representative claimants. These features have made Portugal an increasingly significant jurisdiction for collective antitrust claims, facilitating the involvement of third-party litigation funding. The procedural framework presents a number of fea - tures that are relevant to the conduct of these pro - ceedings. Representative actions can be initiated by qualified associations rather than individual con - sumers, and once commenced, they typically cover affected consumers residing in Portugal on an opt-out basis, with an opt-in mechanism for non-residents. Defendants must put forward their procedural and substantive arguments at an early stage, which may impact litigation strategy, especially in complex or cross-border proceedings. In follow-on actions, the AdC’s final infringement decisions give rise to an irre - buttable presumption of infringement, whereas deci -
sions by competition authorities in other EU member states give rise to a rebuttable presumption. The Trucks Cartel in 2026: EU Clarification of Interest Accrual and Comparative Authority Against the backdrop of the first ruling of Portugal’s Supreme Court (STJ) in a civil damages claim relating to anti-competitive practices (judgment of 13 Febru - ary 2025 in Case No 54/19.6YQSTR.L1.S1), Portugal continues to play a significant role in the pan-Euro - pean trucks cartel litigation (European Commission Decision AT.39824). The ruling held that, where statu - tory default interest applies, compensation should not be adjusted further for inflation, since interest itself serves a compensatory purpose. It also held that, in the absence of domestic quantification precedent, for - eign case law, such as the Spanish Supreme Court’s 5% overcharge benchmark, may serve as persuasive guidance for Portuguese courts. This ruling is now to be read alongside a significant development in 2026. On 30 April 2026, the CJEU ruled in Case C-191/25 ( Wenzel Logistics ) that national rules delaying the accrual of interest in cartel damages actions until the claim is notified, rather than when the harm occurred (ie, in that case, when the inflated price was paid), undermine the effectiveness of Article 101 TFEU. Interest must run from the date of each over - charge payment, assessed separately for each pur - chase where harm arose from multiple transactions. While addressing a different legal issue from the STJ’s February 2025 ruling on inflation indexation, both rul - ings relate to the calculation of the “full compensa - tion” interest component. Portuguese courts should therefore apply the domestic ruling consistently with this EU-law baseline going forward. Pre-Action Disclosure: The CJEU’s Meliá Hotels Ruling On 29 January 2026, the CJEU delivered its judg - ment in Case C-286/24 ( Meliá Hotels ), which arose from a preliminary reference by the STJ regarding a pre-action disclosure request under Article 13 of the Portuguese Private Damages Act (Law No 23/2018). The ruling addressed two questions of fundamental importance for prospective claimants:
136 A NTITRUST LI T IGATI O N 2026
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook