Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
TC_20090385 AI generated

Constitutional Court dismisses claim for conference due to failure to raise constitutional question at lower court.

Case Number TC_20090385
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Constitutional Court rejected the applicants' request to have the case submitted to a conference for review. The applicants failed to challenge the lower court's decision or demonstrate that the constitutional question was not properly raised during the proceedings. Consequently, the court confirmed the initial ruling that the constitutional issue was inadmissible.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 78-A(1) of the Law on Constitutional Admissibility; Art. 78-A(3) and (4) of the Law on Constitutional Admissibility: A claim for conference is inadmissible if the applicant does not impugne the grounds for non-knowledge or contest the failure to raise the constitutional question at the lower court.

Keywords

AI generated
constitutional question admissibility claim for conference onus of raising procedural prerequisites Law on Constitutional Admissibility

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 78-A(1) of the Law on Constitutional Admissibility
Art. 78-A(3) of the Law on Constitutional Admissibility
Art. 78-A(4) of the Law on Constitutional Admissibility
AI generated
290/2018
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses appeal for lack of specific constitutional violation argument regarding civil code and CPC norms.
503/14
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses admissibility claim for non-merger of constitutional challenge with Supreme Court ruling.
TC_20040066
Constitutional Court dismisses abstract constitutional challenge because inconstitucionalidade was not raised as a ratio decidendi question.
358/2012
Constitutional Court dismisses claim regarding burden of proving constitutional issues in criminal appeals.
388/05
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses claim regarding bankruptcy code interpretation and procedural prerequisites. The court rejects the request to review the Supreme Court's decision on bankruptcy proceedings. The court ruled that the constitutional challenge was inadmissible because the applicant failed to question the specific civil law provision establishing the burden of proof. Consequently, the Constitutional Court declined to examine the constitutional validity of the bankruptcy code articles. The applicant must challenge the civil law basis directly rather than the procedural interpretation. The court emphasized that the principle of official knowledge does not waive the duty to raise constitutional issues. The decision affirms that procedural prerequisites must be met for constitutional review. The court found the applicant's arguments regarding the burden of proof were unfounded. The ruling clarifies the proper channel for challenging bankruptcy-related legal provisions. The court maintained that the Supreme Court's application of the civil code was correct. The applicant's failure to address the specific civil law article resulted in dismissal. The decision reinforces the strict requirements for filing constitutional complaints in Portugal.

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 385/09

ACÓRDÃO Nº 385/2009

Proc. n.º 334/09

3ª Secção

Relator: Conselheirao Carlos Fernandes Cadilha

Acordam, em conferência, na 3ª Secção do Tribunal Constitucional

1. A. e cônjuge vêm reclamar para a conferência da decisão sumária proferida a fls. 431 e seguintes, pela qual se decidiu não conhecer do objecto do recurso interposto para o Tribunal Constitucional por incumprimento do ónus de suscitação, perante o tribunal recorrido, da questão de constitucionalidade, limitando-se a aduzir o seguinte:

Nos autos supra referenciados, os recorrentes A. e marido B., notificados da douta decisão sumária produzida pelo Exmo Senhor Conselheiro Relator, nos termos do nº 1 do artº 78º-A da LCT, vêm muito respeitosamente requerer seja, nos termos do artº. 78º.-A, nºs 3 e 4, da mesma LTC, que o assunto seja submetido à conferência, para a qual, em consequência, reclamam”.

Cumpre apreciar e decidir.

2. Na reclamação para a conferência, os recorrentes não impugnam minimamente os fundamentos da decisão de não conhecimento do recurso e não contestam, designadamente, a invocada falta de cumprimento do ónus de suscitação, perante o tribunal recorrido, da questão de constitucionalidade que pretendem ver apreciada pelo Tribunal Constitucional.

Assim sendo, e porque é de manter o julgado por não verificação de um dos pressupostos processuais do recurso, é de indeferir a reclamação.

3. Termos em que se decide desatender a reclamação e confirmar a decisão sumária reclamada.

Custas pelos reclamantes, fixando-se a taxa de justiça em 15 UC.

Lisboa, 23 de Julho de 2009

Carlos Fernandes Cadilha

Maria Lúcia Amaral

Gil Galvão