Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
TC_20010003 AI generated

Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses claim against summary decision rejecting civil penalty constitutionality. The court confirms the summary ruling that civil sanctions do not contradict other penalties. The court rejects the claim because the applicants failed to provide new grounds to challenge the summary decision. The court rules that the burden of proof lies with the applicants to invoke reasons against the summary decision. The court confirms the summary decision of 24 November 2000 regarding civil penalty constitutionality. The court dismisses the claim for lack of new grounds to challenge the summary decision. The court upholds the summary decision on civil penalty constitutionality under Article 78-A of the Constitutional Court Law. The court rejects the claim because the applicants did not present new arguments to overturn the summary decision. The court confirms the summary decision regarding the constitutionality of civil penalty provisions. The court dismisses the claim as it lacks sufficient grounds to challenge the summary decision. The court affirms the summary decision on the constitutionality of civil sanctions in Portuguese law.

Case Number TC_20010003
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Tribunal Constitucional dismissed a claim against a summary decision that rejected the unconstitutionality of civil penalty provisions. The applicants, including JAM, JMM, FM, and LM, sought to overturn the summary ruling which held that civil sanctions do not contradict other types of penalties. The court rejected the claim because the applicants failed to present any new grounds or arguments to challenge the original summary decision, leaving the burden of proof unmet.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 78-A, n.º 3 da Lei do Tribunal Constitucional; The Constitutional Court may confirm a summary decision if the applicants fail to provide new grounds to challenge it, thereby upholding the initial ruling on the merits.

Keywords

AI generated
summary decision review constitutional complaint rejection burden of proof applicants civil penalty constitutionality Tribunal Constitucional procedure

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 78-A, n.º 3 da Lei do Tribunal Constitucional
AI generated
366/11
Constitutional Court dismisses request for nullity due to lack of standing and procedural irregularity. The court rejects the claim for nullity of subsequent proceedings because the applicant lacks standing to react to the opponent's counter-arguments and the relator's decision was legally final regarding the applicant's specific resources. The court ruled that the applicant cannot obstruct the process's conclusion by claiming nullity based on non-notice of counter-arguments, as the relator's decision was already legally effective for her, and the proper remedy for procedural defects would have been a request for conference review, which she did not utilize correctly. The court determined that the applicant's request to declare the entire subsequent process null is inadmissible due to her lack of legal standing to react to the opponent's counter-arguments and the finality of the relator's decision regarding her specific constitutional challenges. The court established that when a relator's decision is legally final for a party, they cannot later claim nullity of subsequent proceedings based on non-notice of counter-arguments, as the proper remedy for procedural defects would have been a request for conference review, which she did not utilize correctly. The court concluded that the applicant's request to declare the entire subsequent process null is inadmissible due to her lack of legal standing to react to the opponent's counter-arguments and the finality of the relator's decision regarding her specific constitutional challenges.
552/2020
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses incidental normative appeal for lack of normative question and utility.
226/2014
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses admissibility claim for failure to raise constitutional issues beforehand.
58/13
Constitutional Court dismisses nullity claim for failure to address specific arguments, ruling only issues must be decided.
1280/2025
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses claim for full hearing due to lack of normative constitutional question.

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 3/01

Acórdão nº 3/01

Proc. nº 611/00

1ª Secção

Relatora: Maria Helena Brito

Acordam, em conferência, na 1ª Secção do Tribunal Constitucional

1. JAM, JMM, FM e LM, notificados da decisão sumária de 24 de Novembro de 2000 (a fls. 1609 e seguintes), que, em aplicação de jurisprudência anterior deste Tribunal, não julgou inconstitucionais as normas dos artigos 36º e 37º do Decreto-Lei n.º 28/84, de 20 de Janeiro, na interpretação segundo a qual "a fixação de sanções civis não é contraditória com a determinação de sanções de outro tipo", e que, tendo em conta a função instrumental do recurso de constitucionalidade, decidiu não tomar conhecimento do recurso por eles interposto, quanto às normas constantes dos artigos 363º e 412º, n.º 4, do Código de Processo Penal, na interpretação segundo a qual não é admissível recurso da matéria de facto das decisões dos Tribunais Colectivos, vieram reclamar para a conferência, ao abrigo do nº 3 do artigo 78º-A da Lei do Tribunal Constitucional.

Lê-se no requerimento apresentado neste Tribunal (a fls. 1623):

"[...] vem [...] reclamar para a conferência, reproduzindo aqui as considerações expendidas nas alegações de recurso para este Tribunal."

2. Notificado para se pronunciar sobre a reclamação apresentada, disse o representante do Ministério Público junto do Tribunal Constitucional:

"1º – A presente reclamação carece obviamente de qualquer fundamento, já que os ora reclamantes nem sequer aduzem quaisquer razões que sejam susceptíveis de pôr em causa a douta decisão sumária proferida nos autos.

2º – Pelo que deverá naturalmente ser julgada improcedente."

3. Os reclamantes não aduzem qualquer fundamento para infirmar o decidido, sendo certo que lhes incumbia o ónus de invocar razões susceptíveis de pôr em causa a decisão sumária proferida.

Nada mais há, pois, do que confirmar a decisão sumária reclamada.

4. Nestes termos, e pelos fundamentos expostos, o Tribunal Constitucional decide indeferir a reclamação, confirmando a decisão sumária reclamada, de 24 de Novembro de 2000.

Custas pelos reclamantes, fixando-se a taxa de justiça em quinze unidades de conta, por cada um.

Lisboa, 16 de Janeiro de 2001

Maria Helena Brito

Vítor Nunes de Almeida

José Manuel Cardoso da Costa