On 6 September 2021, a class action was filed with the Court of Competition, Regulation and Supervision, seeking to defend Portuguese consumers who have been harmed by the unlawful practices of EDP Produção identified in the decision of the Competition Authority (AdC) of 17 September 2019. The case concerns the fact that, between January 2009 and December 2013, EDP abused its dominant position in the secondary regulation band market of the electricity system in mainland Portugal. During those five years, EDP manipulated supply in the remote regulation market, which led to an increase in prices in that market and in the compensation paid to EDP Produção under the CMEC (Costs for Maintaining Contractual Balance) scheme. EDP thus increased its profits, which were borne by consumers. As the State took action to compensate consumers for part of the damage caused by this practice, this action seeks compensation for consumers only in respect of the remaining portion, estimated by the AdC at EUR 94.8 million.
Ius Omnibus is represented in this case by the law firm Sousa Ferro & Associados.
21 December 2021: Defendant submits defence
14 June 2022: The court notifies the parties to state their views on the possibility of staying the proceedings
13 July 2022: The court issues a preliminary ruling, rejecting the defences raised by the defendant that would have prevented the proceedings from continuing (in particular, confirming the admissibility of the action and Ius’s standing to sue), and ruling that the issue of the limitation period will only be decided after evidence has been presented. The court stayed the proceedings until the Competition Authority’s decision becomes final
10 August 2022: The Court upheld the Competition Authority’s decision
23 March 2023: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismissed EDP’s appeal and upheld the stay of the public action ordered by the Competition Court pending a final decision in the public enforcement proceedings
25 September 2023: The Lisbon Court of Appeal fully upholds the TCRS’s judgment regarding EDP’s abuse of a dominant position, reducing the fine from EUR 48 million to EUR 40 million
6 December 2023: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismisses the application, lodged by EDP Produção, seeking to have the judgment handed down on 25 September 2023 declared null and void
22 January 2024: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismisses the application by EDP Produção for the judgment of 6 December 2023 to be set aside
27 March 2024: The Constitutional Court, by summary decision, decides not to hear the appeals lodged by EDP Produção concerning the decisions of the Court of Appeal of 25 September 2023 and 22 January 2024
8 May 2024: The Constitutional Court confirms, by Judgment, the Summary Decision of 27 March 2024
6 June 2024: The Constitutional Court decides, by summary decision, not to hear a second appeal concerning the judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal delivered on 25 September 2023, lodged by EDP Produção
11 July 2024: The Constitutional Court confirms, by judgment, the summary decision of 6 June 2024
25 July 2024: EDP Produção invokes, before the Competition Tribunal, the limitation period for the administrative offence proceedings brought by the AdC
14 November 2024: The Competition Court rules that the limitation period for the administrative offence proceedings invoked by EDP Produção has not expired
12 March 2025: The Lisbon Court of Appeal upholds in full the decision handed down by the Competition Court, ruling that the administrative offence proceedings had not become time-barred
14 May 2025: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismisses in its entirety the appeal lodged by EDP Produção against the judgment of 12 March 2025
The judgement of 12 March 2025 was appealed by EDP to the Constitutional Court, and the outcome is pending.
This is a class action to defend diffuse and homogeneous individual interests, brought by Ius Omnibus.
It is a case to defend consumer rights, brought under the Class Action Law (Law No. 83/95), concerning practices by EDP Produção that breach Article 102 of the TFEU and Article 11 of the Competition Act.
The action is based strictly (as a follow-on action) on the practice identified in the AdC’s decision of 17 September 2019 (PRC/2016/5), against which EDP has lodged an appeal pending before the TCRS.
The AdC found EDP liable for having, over a period of five years, abused its dominant position in energy generation by manipulating supply in the secondary regulation band market of the national electricity system in mainland Portugal. This manipulation resulted from EDP Produção limiting the supply from power stations benefiting from public compensation under the CMEC scheme and concentrating supply on power stations not covered by such compensation.
Through this conduct, EDP Produção unlawfully reduced the supply of secondary regulation capacity from CMEC power stations, leading to an increase in the CMEC compensation it received and a rise in prices in that market due to (i) the submission of above-competitive prices in procurement auctions, (ii) the consequent supply of energy from less efficient power stations, and (iii) the use of capacity from EDP power stations operating under market conditions. This conduct resulted in above-competitive prices in this market and in overcompensation and overpricing paid to EDP, borne by consumers.
This class action represents all consumers who resided in mainland Portugal for at least part of the period during which the anti-competitive practices in question took place and had effect, and who, throughout all or part of that period, held a domestic electricity supply contract, unless they expressly state that they do not wish to be represented.
Consumers do not need to take any action to be represented or to be entitled to compensation should the action be successful.
Any consumer who does not wish to be represented in this action may exercise their right to opt out by notifying the court of their intention. Consumers may also decide to intervene in the proceedings in support of Ius Omnibus.
EDP’s conduct caused harm to the represented consumers in two ways: (i) it resulted in EDP receiving higher CMEC compensation, which is paid for by consumers through their electricity tariffs (first component of the damages); and (ii) it caused wholesale electricity prices to rise, which were passed on to consumers in the retail market (the second component of the damages).
At the time the action was brought by Ius, the damages caused to consumers by these practices had been quantified by an independent audit commissioned by the Government, and had also been estimated in the AdC’s decision.
Ius asks the Court to:
a) declare the infringement to be detrimental to the public interest and consumers’ rights, and order EDP to acknowledge this publicly (including the publication of notices in national newspapers);
b) order EDP to pay compensation to all Portuguese consumers affected by the damage caused by the overcharging.
The mechanism for mass consumer compensation used here, as provided for under the Portuguese rules on class actions, has not yet been tested in practice right through to the final stage. However, according to the law, the following will happen if the court rules in favour of Ius Omnibus:
a) the court will set the total amount of compensation to be paid by EDP to consumers, to be deposited into a compensation fund;
b) the court will appoint a body responsible for managing the compensation fund, including the receipt, management and payment of compensation to affected consumers;
c) the court will set a deadline for consumers to claim their share of the compensation, and this information will be publicised in various ways;
d) consumers will have to contact the body managing the compensation fund and submit the evidence specified by the court, together with payment details, in order to receive their share of the compensation;
e) at the end of the legally established deadline, if any part of the total compensation remains unclaimed by consumers:
(i) that amount shall be used to pay the costs incurred by Ius Omnibus in connection with the proceedings; and
(ii) any remaining amount will be handed over to the Ministry of Justice to be allocated to supporting access to the law and justice, including the promotion of class actions.
Consumers do not have to contact the Court or Ius Omnibus, but it may be in their interest to do so.
All consumers who held domestic electricity contracts in mainland Portugal during the period in which the practice in question was in force are automatically represented in this class action. If they do not wish to be represented, they must exercise their right to opt out. If they wish to be represented, they need take no further action, for the time being, to be entitled to compensation should Ius Omnibus win this case. At the end of the proceedings, should the case be successful, you will need to contact the body designated by the Court to claim your compensation. However, if you wish to intervene in the action in support of Ius Omnibus, you may do so within the time limit to be set by the Court.
All consumers represented in this action are invited to contact Ius Omnibus immediately so that their details can be recorded and they can be kept informed by Ius of all developments in the case, ensuring they do not miss the opportunity to claim their compensation when the time comes.
On 17 September 2026, another class action was filed with the Court of Competition, Regulation and Supervision (Judge 3), under case number 12/26.4YQSTR, in which Ius Omnibus seeks an order requiring EDP Produção to pay compensation to the consumers it represents for the damages caused by the CMEC overcompensation, which is borne by consumers through their electricity tariffs (the first component of the damages), amounting to an estimated EUR 70.2 million.
21 December 2021: Defendant submits defence
14 June 2022: The court notifies the parties to state their views on the possibility of staying the proceedings
13 July 2022: The court issues a preliminary ruling, rejecting the defences raised by the defendant that would have prevented the proceedings from continuing (in particular, confirming the admissibility of the action and Ius’s standing to sue), and ruling that the issue of the limitation period will only be decided after evidence has been presented. The court stayed the proceedings until the Competition Authority’s decision becomes final
10 August 2022: The Court upheld the Competition Authority’s decision
23 March 2023: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismissed EDP’s appeal and upheld the stay of the public action ordered by the Competition Court pending a final decision in the public enforcement proceedings
25 September 2023: The Lisbon Court of Appeal fully upholds the TCRS’s judgment regarding EDP’s abuse of a dominant position, reducing the fine from EUR 48 million to EUR 40 million
6 December 2023: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismisses the application, lodged by EDP Produção, seeking to have the judgment handed down on 25 September 2023 declared null and void
22 January 2024: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismisses the application by EDP Produção for the judgment of 6 December 2023 to be set aside
27 March 2024: The Constitutional Court, by summary decision, decides not to hear the appeals lodged by EDP Produção concerning the decisions of the Court of Appeal of 25 September 2023 and 22 January 2024
8 May 2024: The Constitutional Court confirms, by Judgment, the Summary Decision of 27 March 2024
6 June 2024: The Constitutional Court decides, by summary decision, not to hear a second appeal concerning the judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal delivered on 25 September 2023, lodged by EDP Produção
11 July 2024: The Constitutional Court confirms, by judgment, the summary decision of 6 June 2024
25 July 2024: EDP Produção invokes, before the Competition Tribunal, the limitation period for the administrative offence proceedings brought by the AdC
14 November 2024: The Competition Court rules that the limitation period for the administrative offence proceedings invoked by EDP Produção has not expired
12 March 2025: The Lisbon Court of Appeal upholds in full the decision handed down by the Competition Court, ruling that the administrative offence proceedings had not become time-barred
14 May 2025: The Lisbon Court of Appeal dismisses in its entirety the appeal lodged by EDP Produção against the judgment of 12 March 2025
The judgement of 12 March 2025 was appealed by EDP to the Constitutional Court, and the outcome is pending.
No press clippings available.