Go back to News
NEWS
Unconstitutionality of the EESC on renewables hints at a new wave of litigation | Capital Verde
Capital Verde has published an article on the unconstitutionality of the CESE on renewables that hints at a new wave of litigation.
Gómez Acebo & Pombo was contacted to give its opinion and advises that “[…] companies operating in the same sectors to which the rulings relate and which have not yet challenged them should do so quickly. The expectation that they will be able to benefit from this line of case law from the TC and see the CESE cancelled is very high.”
Nuno Oliveira Garcia, tax partner at the Lisbon office, also states that “the CESE that has been paid by the companies will have to be returned by the state” and adds that “the question may arise as to whether compensatory interest will be due.”
Read the article
Gómez Acebo & Pombo was contacted to give its opinion and advises that “[…] companies operating in the same sectors to which the rulings relate and which have not yet challenged them should do so quickly. The expectation that they will be able to benefit from this line of case law from the TC and see the CESE cancelled is very high.”
Nuno Oliveira Garcia, tax partner at the Lisbon office, also states that “the CESE that has been paid by the companies will have to be returned by the state” and adds that “the question may arise as to whether compensatory interest will be due.”
Read the article
Lawyer mentioned
Nuno de Oliveira Garcia – Partner
Press contact
Sandra Cuesta
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Sandra Cuesta
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
PUBLICATION
¡NEW!
Irregularities in public sector staffing. Jurisdiction and/or substantive law
When a serious irregularity is found in administrative contracts owing to their employment character, jurisdiction lies with the employment branch of the court system. However, if the administrative route is not outside the scope of the law, jurisdiction lies with the judicial review branch of the court system.
PUBLICATION
5 days ago
Squeeze-out of minority shareholders following successful mandatory takeover bid: rebuttable presumption of fair consideration
The Court of Justice of the European Union (Fifth Chamber), in its judgment of 27 November 2025 (Case C-567/24, Svema Trade), concerning the equitable price in a squeeze-out requiring minority shareholders to sell their shares to an offeror who, following a mandatory takeover bid, has acquired more than 90% of the capital carrying voting rights in the company subject of the takeover bid, states that the presumption that the price offered in the bid, in the context of such a squeeze-out of holders of securities, is equitable is rebuttable.
PUBLICATION
13 Feb, 2026
Senior management, membership of the board of directors and insolvency proceedings: single association theory yes, but also employer-employee relationship
Despite classifying the association as a commercial relationship and not an employment relationship, compensation amounts for termination of contract are allowed if they match those accepted by the insolvency practitioners, just as remuneration amounts are allowed if said practitioners had decided to accept remuneration in some months but not in others.
PUBLICATION
10 Feb, 2026
Application of Austrian law to liability in tort of directors of Maltese company offering online games of chance in Austria
The CJEU clarifies two important issues regarding the application of the Rome II Regulation: the scope of the exception relating to corporate matters and the determination of the place of damage in the case of games of chance offered via the internet from one Member State in another Member State without the licence required in the latter Member State.
PUBLICATION
09 Feb, 2026
Notarial enforcement of pledges. Is Article 1872 of the Civil Code mandatory? In what sense?
The clause agreed upon must comply, for greater certainty, with the provisions of the new judicial enforcement procedure. It will be necessary to agree on an appraised value, which is not required in Article 1872 CC, because otherwise the award would be similar to a ‘forfeiture proviso’ (pactum commissorium), which the Civil Code neutralised with the drastic imposition of extinguishment of the debt in its entirety.
PUBLICATION
06 Feb, 2026
Automotive and Sustainable Mobility No. 29
Summary of legislative and jurisprudential developments relating to the automotive sector.
PUBLICATION
06 Feb, 2026
How does the Customer Services Act 10/2025 of 26 December affect insurers?
Act 10/2025 amends Act 44/2002 and requires the updating of regulations for customer services. It comes into force on 28/12/2025, with a twelve-month adaptation period. It enhances accessibility and personalised assistance; it prohibits answering machines and call forwarding from toll-free numbers to paid lines. It requires the separation of customer services from commercial functions and specialised staff training, including assistance to vulnerable groups. It also expands customer information, prohibits complaints by telephone and allows co-official languages. It also establishes acknowledgement with an identification code and new grounds for non-acceptance; sets a deadline of one month for resolving complaints to customer services and ninety days for complaints to the Directorate-General for Insurance and Pension Funds, and specifies the requirements for acceptance.
PUBLICATION
29 Jan, 2026
On Call Protocol for the Alimentaria and Hostelco 2026 Trade Fairs
In preparation for the Alimentaria and Hostelco 2026 trade fairs, the Commercial Section of the Barcelona First Instance Court has approved a rapid response protocol to deal promptly with any potential conflicts relating to intellectual and industrial property rights (patents,trademarks, designs, and copyright), as well as trade secrets and unfair competition issues that may arise during these events.
PUBLICATION
27 Jan, 2026
Jurisdiction of national courts of States party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court in respect of actions relating to classic European patents during the transitional period
During the transitional period of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, national courts retain jurisdiction to hear cases concerning classic European patents, without the need for the proprietor to have exercised the opt-out option, i.e. without the need to have excluded the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court over such patents. However, the Venice Court ruling discussed here considers that national courts may only be used if the opt-out has been exercised, contradicting the provisions of Article 83 of the Agreement.