Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
100/90 AI generated

Constitutional court dismisses appeal after prior ruling declared challenged administrative norms unconstitutional.

Case Number 100/90
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Constitutional Court denied the appeal filed by the Public Prosecutor against a lower court's refusal to apply specific administrative regulations. Although the lower court had declined to apply these norms, the Constitutional Court had previously declared them unconstitutional in a separate ruling. Consequently, the court confirmed the lower court's decision by negating the appeal based on the established unconstitutionality.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Portaria n.º 760/85; Decreto-Lei n.º 466/85; When a court declares specific administrative norms unconstitutional, subsequent appeals challenging the application of those norms must be dismissed.

Keywords

AI generated
constitutional unconstitutionality administrative norms declaration of unconstitutionality public prosecutor appeal confirmation of lower court decision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Portaria n.º 760/85, de 4 de Outubro
Decreto-Lei n.º 466/85, de 5 de Novembro
Decreto n.º 360/71, de 21 de Agosto

Cited Case Law

AI generated
Acórdão n.º 61/91
Entretanto, este Tribunal declarou, com força obrigatória geral, a inconstitucionalidade das referidas normas, através do Acórdão n.º 61/91 (D.R., I série-A, de 1 de Abril de 1991).
AI generated
84/91
Constitutional Court dismisses appeal after declaring the challenged administrative norm unconstitutional by prior decision.
94/91
Constitutional court dismisses appeal after declaring the challenged administrative norm unconstitutional in a prior ruling.
171/91
Constitutional Court dismisses appeal after declaring the challenged administrative norm unconstitutional by prior ruling.
318/90
Constitutional Court dismisses appeal after declaring the challenged administrative norm unconstitutional by prior ruling.
342/90
Constitutional court dismisses appeal after declaring the challenged administrative norm unconstitutional by general force. The court rejects the appeal because the norm was already declared unconstitutional with general binding force. The court applies the principle that a norm declared unconstitutional with general binding force cannot be applied. The court rules that the norm is void and the appeal must be rejected. The court holds that the norm is inapplicable due to its prior unconstitutional declaration. The court concludes that the appeal is inadmissible because the norm is already void. The court affirms that the norm cannot be applied after its unconstitutional declaration. The court states that the norm is invalid and the appeal must fail. The court determines that the norm is unenforceable due to its constitutional violation. The court finds that the norm is legally ineffective and the appeal is rejected.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

ACÓRDÃO N

ACÓRDÃO N.º 138/91

Processo n.º 100/90

2ª Secção

Relator: Conselheiro Sousa e Brito

Acordam na 2ª Secção do Tribunal Constitucional:

No presente processo, em que é recorrente o Ministério Público e recorrido A., o tribunal a quo recusou aplicar as normas da alínea b) do n.º 3° da Portaria n.º 760/85, de 4 de Outubro e do artigo 4° do Decreto-Lei n.º 466/85, de 5 de Novembro, na parte em que deu nova redacção ao artigo 65°, n.º 1, do Decreto n.º 360/71, de 21 de Agosto.

Desta decisão foi interposto recurso para o Tribunal Constitucional.

Entretanto, este Tribunal declarou, com força obrigatória geral, a inconstitucionalidade das referidas normas, através do Acórdão n.º 61/91 (D.R., I série-A, de 1 de Abril de 1991).

Nestes termos, em aplicação da mencionada declaração de inconstitucionalidade, decide-se negar provimento ao recurso e confirmar a decisão recorrida.

Lisboa, 24 de Abril de 1991.

José de Sousa e Brito

Messias Bento

Bravo Serra

Luís Nunes de Almeida

Fernando Alves Correia

Mário de Brito

José Manuel Cardoso da Costa.