DAMAGES ACTIONS
Banking Cartel
All consumers resident in Portugal who took out home or consumer loans between (month) 2002 and (month) 2013 or who bought products/services from Portuguese SMEs during that period have suffered damage.
Is this your case? Register: https://www.carteldabanca.pt
Ius filed five lawsuits against the ‘Banking Cartel’ in January 2024 at the Court of Competition, Regulation and Supervision (‘TCRS’). The actions were divided according to the type of credit (Housing and Consumer Credit; SME Credit) and depending on whether the banks were still appealing the decision of the Competition Authority (‘AdC’).
According to the economists who carried out a study for Ius, the ‘Banking Cartel’ caused more than 5.5 billion euros in damage to Portuguese consumers.
5 actions:
– Housing and Consumer Credit:
o Deutsche Bank: Dispute filed.
o ABanca: Defence filed. Suspension requested by the bank rejected.
o Barclays: Deadline for defence running.
o Others: Court suspended the action until the PCA’s final decision, before the Objections, at the request of most of the banks. Ius appealed against the suspension.
– SME credit (repercussions for consumers): Deadline to contest. Suspension requested by the banks rejected.
Ius called on the banks to agree to adopt information retention measures that would guarantee a high rate of distribution of any compensation to injured consumers. None agreed to do so.
In July, the European Court of Justice confirmed that the banks’ behaviour violated European competition law. In September, the TCRS confirmed the PCA’s decision. But the banks still have the right to appeal to the Lisbon Court of Appeal (‘TRL’; and several have already announced that they will do so), as well as to the Constitutional Court.
Sony PlayStation
All consumers resident in Portugal who have purchased physical or digital games and/or paid for in-game content for PlayStation 4 or PlayStation 5, and/or who have subscribed to the PlayStation Plus Essential service, from 29 November 2013 to the present, have been harmed].
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/openupplaystation-pt/
The Defendants were served and filed their Defences in May 2024.
The Defendants have insisted on the confidentiality of the case to prevent access by third parties (including consumers).
By agreement of the parties, the TCRS dispensed with the need for a prior hearing, so we are awaiting notification of the final judgement, in which the Court will identify the subject matter of the dispute and set out the topics of evidence.
Flo Health
All consumers living in Portugal who, between 30 June 2016 and 23 February 2019, downloaded and used the application developed by Flo Health, called ‘My Flo menstrual calendar’ or ‘Flo Ovulation and Period Tracker’, have been harmed.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-flo-health-inc-pt/
In this action for violation of the privacy and personal data of women who used this menstrual cycle control application, the Defendant has already presented its defence. Despite having confessed to the infringement before the American authorities, the Defendant refuses to admit its behaviour or take responsibility towards Portuguese consumers.
Ius responded to Flo Health’s defence and submitted a new financing agreement for this action, the admissibility of which the Defendant contested.
The court scheduled the preliminary hearing for 15 January 2025.
TikTok ≥ 13
All consumers resident in Portugal who, after 3 August 2018, were aged 13 or over on their first use of the TikTok platform or later, have suffered damages.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-tiktok-mais-13/
The Defendants have already submitted their defence. Ius has taken a position on the documents submitted by the Defendants.
The Court is expected to schedule the preliminary hearing.
TikTok ≤ 13
All consumers residing in Portugal who used the TikTok platform after 3 August 2018 and who had not yet reached the age of 13 when they first used it have been harmed.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-tiktok-menos-13/
The deadline for TikTok to present its defence is ticking.
Mastercard
All consumers resident in Portugal have suffered damages as a result of Mastercard’s competitive infringements.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-mastercard-pt/
Recently, the Court ordered the Defendants to attach most of the documents requested by Ius to the case. Mastercard appealed against this decision and Ius counter appealed. The TRL’s decision is awaited.
The Court has asked the European Commission for clarification on the scope of the infringement it has declared and the reasons why it has delimited it as it has.
Pubmatic
All consumers resident in Portugal who, between 30 August 2012 and the date on which the consumers were summoned in this action, accessed websites, applications and other platforms through which PubMatic’s cookies and other tracking technologies were placed on the devices used, and who were at least 13 years old, were harmed.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-pubmatic-pt/
This class action has been admitted. The Defendant’s summons has not yet been finalised.
EDP
All consumers resident in Portugal who held a domestic electricity supply contract between January 2009 and December 2013 have been harmed.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-edp-pt/
The popular action filed by Ius is suspended, pending the PCA’s final decision. After all the appeals and complaints (admissible and inadmissible) lodged by EDP had been exhausted, and after the final decision handed down by the Constitutional Court, the Defendant requested that the TCRS declare that the fines imposed were time-barred.
Once this last delaying manoeuvre has been overcome, the action brought by Ius should proceed.
This case is special because not only has the offence already been proven, but the public authorities have already quantified the damage caused to consumers. However, EDP continues to insist that it has done nothing illegal and that it is certain that it will not be ordered to compensate consumers, as it has not set up any provisions.
Meo / Nowo cartel
All consumers resident in Portugal who contracted stand-alone mobile telecommunications services in Portugal, or packages of mobile and fixed telecommunications services, between 20 November 2017 and 31 December 2019 and/or who purchased, during or after the same period, goods or services from Portuguese companies that contracted the same telecommunications services in Portugal, have been harmed.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/cartel-das-telecomunicacoes-meo-nowo/
The AdC’s decision identifying this cartel was upheld by the TRL, but the Constitutional Court declared that the emails used as evidence had been seized illegally.
In the Ius actions, Meo and Nowo presented their defences. Both refuse any responsibility for compensating consumers, including Nowo, which confessed the cartel to the PCA.
Meo argued that the judge was impeded because she had decided the appeal against the PCA’s decision. The argument was rejected and Meo filed an appeal.
In the action against Nowo, the Court is expected to decide whether to join this action with the action against Meo.
Apple App
All consumers resident in Portugal who have downloaded (for free or for a fee) iOS applications from the Portuguese Apple App Store and/or who have purchased iOS application content through Apple’s in-app payment mechanism since 10 July 2008 have been harmed.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-apple-app-store-pt/
Apple filed its defence. At the preliminary hearing, the Court decided to suspend the action until final decisions have been adopted (i.e. appeals have been exhausted) by the European Commission in 3 open investigations into Apple’s behaviour
This means that this action for consumer compensation would predictably be put on hold for at least 7 years. Ius has appealed against this suspension. A decision is awaited from the Court of First Instance.
Google App
All consumers resident in Portugal who downloaded (for free or for a fee) Android apps from the Portuguese Google Play Store and/or who purchased Android app content via Google’s in-app payment mechanism from 6 July 2009 to the present have suffered damages.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-google-play-store-pt/
At the preliminary hearing, the Court suspended the proceedings until a final decision was taken by the European Commission in the Google Shopping case. The Court of Justice of the European Union definitively confirmed this decision in September. The suspension is expected to be lifted and the case will continue.
The Court decided to join this action with another popular action on the same practices, brought against another subsidiary of the Google group, by Fabrizio Esposito.
Clinique
All consumers resident in Portugal who purchased cosmetic products from the ‘Redness’ cosmetic line, directly or indirectly, in physical establishments or via online sales platforms, have been harmed.
Is this your case? Register: https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-estee-lauder-clinique-pt/
The popular action has been admitted. The Defendants’ summons has not yet been finalised.
Hub & Spoke
The AdC identified ten hub & spoke agreements between suppliers and the large Portuguese supermarket chains: for a decade, these suppliers coordinated the prices of their products for consumers with the retailers.
Ius filed ten lawsuits asking that suppliers be forced to preserve evidence needed for damages claims. The TCRS rejected the request in all actions, on the grounds that preservation of evidence was unnecessary. Ius considers that the actions were useful in clarifying the Court’s position on several issues that will be decisive in damages actions.
Ius has already brought actions for damages against (i) SCC – Sociedade Central de Cervejas e Bebidas, S.A., (ii) Primedrinks – Comercialização de Bebidas Alcoólicas e Produtos Alimentares, Lda, (iii) Beiersdorf Portuguesa, Lda. and (iv) Active Brands – Distribuição e Comercialização de Marcas, S.A., Gestvinus – Investimentos e Serviços Vitivinícolas e Comerciais, S.A. and Sogevinus – S.G.P.S., S.A..
The TCRS has already admitted the action brought against Primedrinks and ordered it to be summoned. The deadline is now running for the defendant to present its defence, if it so wishes.
Ius will soon be filing class actions against the other suppliers.
OTHER ACTIONS
Meliá (https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-melia-pt/)
Ius won the access to evidence case against Meliá at the TCRS and TRL, based on the European Commission’s decision declaring that the hotel chain had entered into agreements restricting competition.
Meliá filed an extraordinary appeal with the Supreme Court of Justice, which admitted it and decided to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) for a preliminary ruling. Ius has already submitted its observations to the CJEU.
Comcast / Universal (https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/ius-omnibus-v-comcast-universal-studios-pt/)
Ius won the access to evidence case against Comcast / Universal at the TCRS, based on the European Commission’s decision declaring that the company had violated competition law. On appeal, the TRL ordered the TCRS to review the judgement on some facts which, in Ius’ opinion, will not change the outcome of the case.
In the meantime, the Defendant asked the TRL to suspend the action to await the CJEU’s responses in the Meliá case. The TRL refused.
The defendant again asked the TCRS to stay the proceedings. Ius has already replied, in favour of not suspending the case.
Vegetable cartel (Bonduelle)
On the basis of the European Commission’s decision declaring a ‘vegetable cartel’, Ius brought an action against Bonduelle for access to evidence, in order to obtain the documents needed to confirm that Portuguese consumers had been harmed and to quantify this damage. On the basis of the information provided in Bonduelle’s defence, Ius withdrew the action on the grounds that it had already been provided with the data it needed to proceed with an action for damages. Ius is in the process of preparing such a claim.
Electronic Complaints Book (ECB) (https://iusomnibus.eu/pt/livro-de-reclamacoes-eletronico/)
Ius believes that it is unacceptable that large foreign companies (such as Apple, Airbnb, Shein and Microsoft) do not have to make the E-Register available, and can make it more difficult for Portuguese consumers to submit complaints and for them to be brought to the attention of the Portuguese supervisory authorities, but that their smaller competitors have this obligation.
Ius has filed eight lawsuits against companies with online sales that don’t provide LRE, asking only that they be ordered to fulfil this obligation.
In the cases brought against Showroomprivé and Gamezone, an agreement was reached and these companies started to make LRE available.
As for the actions brought against Spartoo, Airbnb and Contexlogic, the outcome was not favourable to Portuguese consumers. In these cases, the courts held that companies based in another member state do not have to provide LRE. One of the courts also argued that there can be no civil action to force compliance with this regime. Ius does not agree with these rulings and has therefore appealed the decision handed down in the case brought against Spartoo, and the appeals in the other two cases will be filed shortly.