PORTUGAL Law and Practice Contributed by: Armando Martins Ferreira, Inês Sequeira Mendes and Margarida Calixto Kolmer, Abreu Advogados
jurisdiction for a cartel offence, nor are there any known cases of Portuguese nationals agreeing to serve jail time abroad as part of a plea bargain in a foreign enforcement action. 5.6 Relevance of Effective Compliance Programmes Portugal follows the general principles of EU competition enforcement, and while the PCA has not published detailed formal guidelines on compliance programmes (as some other national authorities have), it has in various deci - sions and public statements acknowledged their relevance. In some cases, the PCA has noted the lack of compliance culture as an aggravating factor, suggesting that companies are expected to take internal compliance seriously. Under Portuguese competition law, the existence of an effective compliance programme can be considered as a mitigating factor when the PCA is determining the amount of a fine. However, the weight given to such a programme depends heavily on its genuine effectiveness and the con - text of the infringement. The programme must be shown to have been well-structured, actively implemented, and tailored to the company’s risk profile, rather than simply existing on paper. If a company is found to have violated competi - tion law – such as by participating in a cartel – the PCA will not automatically treat the existence of a compliance programme as a reason per se to reduce the fine. 5.7 Mandatory Consumer Redress Sanctions imposed by the PCA are primarily administrative fines and do not typically include mandatory consumer redress or restitution as part of the public enforcement process. The PCA’s main role is to investigate and sanction
anti-competitive conduct, not to award compen - sation to affected consumers or businesses. However, the PCA’s decisions can have impor - tant consequences for private litigation, includ - ing actions for damages or restitution. Portu - guese law explicitly allows for follow-on actions, meaning that once the PCA finds an infringe - ment (such as a cartel or abuse of dominance), injured parties – including consumers, competi - tors, or public entities – can use that decision as the basis for a civil claim for compensation before the courts. Portugal transposed the EU Antitrust Damages Directive (Directive 2014/104/ EU) through Law No 23/2018, which strength - ened the legal framework for private damages actions. As a result, although the PCA itself does not impose restitution, its decision can trigger or support civil litigation that may lead to redress. The existence of ongoing or planned private litigation does not typically influence the PCA’s decision on whether to sanction, but it may affect how and when redress is ultimately obtained by As a rule, the decisions handed down by the PCA can be appealed to the CRSC. However, the Competition Act sets out that certain PCA decisions may not be appealed. After being notified of a final decision, the party concerned must lodge the appeal before the PCA within 60 days (appeals against interlocu - tory decisions or against any interim measure adopted have shorter deadlines). The PCA then has 60 days to forward all relevant documen - tation to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. The Competition Act allows the PCA to present its own allegations at this stage, along with other consumers or other injured parties. 5.8 Judicial Review or Appeal
278 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook