Basic information			Substance of the ruling			Accessibility of the case and further relevant links
Date	Name of the case (or case number)	The body delivering the decision	Keywords, topic	Executive part	Brief summary	Full text	Page at the website of the issuing court	Page in other databases	Unofficial materials, press communications
February 1. 2022.	Ruling No. 89/2022 - Appeal	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Freedom of movement; right to education; rights of children	The Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal held that the quarantine of students for two weeks due to a positive Covid-19 case in the class was unconstitutional.	A girl was put in quarantine for two weeks because a Covid-19 case was detected in her class. Her father challenged her detention before the courts, which immediately ordered the release of the quarantined student. The authorities turned to the Constitutional Tribunal which upheld the father's claim and ordered the release of the girl. The Constitutional Tribunal held that only the legislation could regulate deprivation of freedom, the executive shall not adopt such rules even if an emergency has been declared.	https://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/en/acordaos/20220089s.html
October 11. 2021.	No. 868/2021.	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Freedom of movement; right to a fair trial; criminal law; separation of powers	The Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal held that an amendment of the Criminal Code with an executive decree was constitutional during the public health emergency.	An entrepreneur was charged with disobedience with the orders and instructions of authorities during the Covid-19 pandemic. During the public health emergency, a governmental decree amended the Criminal Code and envisaged more serious sanctions for those committing the felony of disobedience with the orders and instructions of the authorities. The regional court annulled the fine imposed by the first instance court on the ground that the decree was unconstitutional since aggravated penalty shall not be provided unless prescribed by a statute. However, for the motion of the Public Attorney's Office, the Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal considered that within extraordinary circumstances constituted by the global pandemic, part of the legislative power shall be conferred upon the executive, therefore, the Government may aggravate certain penalties through executive decrees within its competence to adopt extraordinary limitations of fundamental rights.	http://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20210868.html		https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/portugal-constitutional-court-acordao-8682021-processo-9372020-2021-10-11	http://www.sn.pl/sites/orzecznictwo/Orzeczenia3/I%20NSW%20304-20.pdf
September 22. 2021.	No 738/2021.	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Virtual hearings; equality of arms	The Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal held that a virtual trial in the second instance might be constitutional even if the first instance trials were held in person.	In a commercial proceeding, the first instance trials were conducted via in person hearings, however, the appellate court ordered online trials due to the public health concerns. One of the parties turned to the Constitutional Tribunal and contested the constitutionality of this decision, however, this claim was dismissed by the Constitutional Tribunal. The Constitutional Tribunal held that the measure did not undermine the equality of arms.				https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2023-07/flash_news_special_edition-1-2022_en.pdf
July 14. 2021.	No. 545/2021.	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Right to social security; right to conduct a business; right to employment; national budget			http://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20210545.html		https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/portugal-constitutional-court-no-5452021-process-3562021-2021-07-14
May 27. 2021.	No. 352/2021.	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Freedom of movement; right to a fair trial; criminal law; separation of powers	The Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal held, that the aggravataion of a criminal sanction by an executive order during the public health emergency was constitutional.	A person was convicted for disobedience for the non-compliance with the public health restrictions during the public health emergency. The regional court annulled the criminal sanction imposed on him, because an executive order aggravated the maximum penalty to be imposed for disobedience during the public health emergency, which was deemed to be unconstitutional. The Constitutional Tribunal held, that fundamental rights might be subject to extraordinary restrictions during the public health emergency, and a part of the legislative competence has been conferred upon the executive during this period. As a consequence, the executive could enact proportionate measures even with the amendment of acts such as the criminal code, therefore, the aggravation of the criminal sanction was constitutional.	http://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20210352.html		https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/portugal-constitutional-court-acordao-3522021-processo-3972020-2021-05-27
April 14. 2021	No. 216/2021.	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Rights of prisoners; freedom of expression	The Constitutional Tribunal held that the code on the execution of criminal penalties constitutes an executive regulation rather than a law, therefore, it shall not be subject to a constitutional review.	A prisoner participated in a video protesting against the governmental detention policies  and called for additional measures for the protection of prisoners during the Covid-19 pandemic. For this reason, a 10-days-long penalty in a restricted cell was imposed on him. The prisoner requested the annullation of the relevant provision of the Code on Execution of Criminal Penalties which - according to his view - restricted unconstitutionally his freedom of expression. The Lower courts rejected his claim, and this was also upheld by the Constitutional Tribunal. The Constitutional Tribunal considered that the code on the execution of criminal penalties constitutes an executive regulation rather than a law, therefore, it should not be subject to constitutional review.	http://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20210216.html		https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/portugal-constitutional-court-processo-22021-decisao-2162021-2021-04-14
December 21. 2020.	No. 769/2020.	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Right to movement; right to personal freedom	The Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal held that the mandatory quarantine ordered by the regional government of the Azores and the judicial validation procedure established to review such confinements are unconstitutional.	The Constitutional Tribunal heard a challenge by the Public Attorney's Office submitted against the order adopted by the regional government of the Azores to impose mandatory quarantine on those travelling from outside to the Azores without suitable vaccination or negative Covid-19 test documentation. The regional government also ruled that mandatory quarantine measures should be subject to mandatory judicial review. Once a quarantine was imposed by the Azori authorities this was challenged before the ordinary courts, which nullified quarantine measures as unconstitutional ones. These judgments were attacked before the Constitutional Court which upheld the unconstitutionality of the mandatory quarantine regime and the mechanism established for its judicial validation. The Constitutional Tribunal argued that preventive confinement without proof of infection amounts to deprivation of liberty, while no new competence should be provided for the judiciary unless stipulated explicitely by the Constitution. Therefore, the impugned measures of the Azores regional government were unconstitutional.	http://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20200769.html		https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/portugal-portuguese-constitutional-court-judgment-no-7692020-2020-12-21
July 31. 2020.	No. 424/2020.	Constitutional Tribunal of Portugal	Freedom of movement; right to privacy; right to employment	The Constitutional Tribunal held that the confinement of a pilot in the Azores arriving from Lisbon on public health ground amounted to an unconstitutional limitation of his fredoom of movement, right to privacy and right to work, therefore, regional authorities were ordered to lift his detention.	A pilot residing in the Azores arrived back from Lisbon to Punta Delgada, where he was quarantined in a hotel for two weeks on public health grounds without further investigations based on Covid-19 concerns. The pilot challenged this decision before the ordinary court which held his confinement unconstitutional, but this was appealed by the Public Attorney's Office before the Constitutional Tribunal. The Regional Government of the Azores argued that the quarantine did not amount to a deprivation of liberty since the pilot was aware of the regulations enacted by the Azores Regional Government, moreover, he was allowed to return to Lisbon from Punta Delgada without restrictions. In the meantime, the pilot raised the alleged violation of his freedom of movement, right to privacy and right to work by the impugned measure. The Constitutional Court held that the quarantine measure amounted to a deprivation of liberty without proper justification, moreover, regional governments are not allowed to restrict fundamental rights even during the public health emergency, therefore, the impugned measures were nullified and the pilot was ordered to be released.	http://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/acordaos/20200424.html		https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/portugal-constitutional-court-decision-4242020-2020-07-31	https://www.jurist.org/news/2020/08/portugal-constitutional-court-declares-azores-quarantine-for-visitors-unconstitutional/; https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/azores-quarantine-considered-a-violation-of-the-constitution/55218