Ius Omnibus, a consumer protection association, has brought a court action against the main Portuguese private hospital groups, accused of having colluded on prices amongst themselves in negotiations with ADSE.
The case was filed on 2 January 2026 at the Court of Competition, Regulation and Supervision in Santarém. The aim is to obtain documents proving that consumers paid more than they should have for healthcare services due to these companies’ illegal practices. If the documents confirm the losses, the association intends to pursue a claim for compensation on behalf of all affected consumers.
The action is directed against the Portuguese Association of Private Hospitals (APHP) and eight companies in the private healthcare sector: Grupo Trofa Saúde, Hospital Privado da Trofa, Hospital Particular do Algarve (HPA), José de Mello Capital, CUF, Lusíadas SGPS, Lusíadas and Luz Saúde.
According to an investigation by the Competition Authority (the public body responsible for enforcing competition rules in Portugal), between October 2014 and March 2019 these private hospitals colluded to set the prices and conditions they would demand in negotiations with ADSE. They also coordinated threats to withdraw from agreements with ADSE in order to put pressure on this healthcare sub-system.
Thus, instead of competing against one another to offer better prices and conditions, these hospitals joined forces to act collectively, which gave them greater bargaining power. This type of collusion between competitors is prohibited by law, as it harms consumers.
This coordination between hospitals is believed to have resulted in higher prices for healthcare services. Consumers were affected in two ways: through the monthly premiums they pay to ADSE (or to other health schemes and insurers) and through the amounts they pay directly when they go to hospital (so-called co-payments).
Furthermore, it is believed that the price increase has also extended to other contexts, namely to services provided under other health sub-systems, health insurance schemes or paid for entirely by the consumer themselves.
The Competition Authority opened an investigation in March 2019 and, in June 2022, found these companies guilty of breaching competition law. However, this decision was challenged in court, which quashed part of the proceedings on technical grounds relating to the manner in which certain evidence was gathered. The case returned to the Competition Authority, which in June 2025 issued a new formal charge, this time covering only the period between 2016 and 2019 and excluding José de Mello Capital.
The action aims to protect all persons residing in Portugal who, between October 2014 and March 2019, used the services of private hospitals, whether paying directly or through ADSE, other public or private healthcare schemes (such as ADM, SAD-PSP, SAD-GNR or SAMS) or health insurance.
Also covered are beneficiaries of these schemes or insurance policies who, even if they did not use these services during that period, may have been adversely affected through the monthly contributions they paid.
The services in question include general and specialist consultations, diagnostic tests, treatments and surgeries (excluding purely cosmetic procedures).
At this stage, Ius Omnibus merely seeks access to documents that will enable it to confirm and quantify the losses suffered by consumers. If these documents demonstrate that damage has indeed occurred, the association intends to bring a claim for compensation on behalf of all affected consumers.
Identification of the Parties
Plaintiff: Ius Omnibus Association
Defendants: Portuguese Association of Private Hospitals (APHP), G.T.S – Grupo Trofa Saúde, SGPS, S.A. (Trofa SGPS), Hospital Privado da Trofa, S.A. (Trofa), Hospital Particular do Algarve, S.A. (HPA), José de Mello Capital, S.A. (JM Capital), CUF, S.A. (CUF), Lusíadas, SGPS, S.A. (Lusíadas SGPS), Lusíadas, S.A. (Lusíadas), Luz Saúde, S.A. (Luz)
Court
Santarém Court of Competition, Regulation and Supervision – Competition, Regulation and Supervision Division (Judge 3)
Number of the process
2/26.7YQSTR (Class action)
Request (in summary)
a) That the Defendants be summoned to produce the documents listed in paragraph 920 of the initial petition;
b) That the Court determine which documents are strictly necessary to enable Ius to confirm and prove in court that Portuguese consumers have been harmed by the anti-competitive practices in question, and the amount of damages caused to them, and that the Defendants be summoned to produce them;
c) That the Defendants be notified of Ius’s intention, on behalf of all the consumers it represents, to bring an action against the Defendants for compensation on behalf of consumers resident in Portugal affected by the anti-competitive practices in question, should it be confirmed that the homogeneous individual interests of Portuguese consumers have been harmed.
Status of the lawsuit
Pending
Consumer’s summons
14 January 2026 Order directing the summons of consumers so that, if they so wish, they may intervene in the proceedings as principal parties or declare in the record whether or not they accept being represented by the Plaintiff, or whether, on the contrary, they exclude themselves from such representation, on pain of their inaction being deemed acceptance.
You can view the Court’s notice here.
This is a class action to defend the homogeneous individual interests of consumers, brought by Ius Omnibus. The main objective is to obtain access to evidence, with a view to enabling the association to subsequently bring a claim for compensation on behalf of all affected consumers.
It is an action to defend consumer rights brought under Articles 52(3) and 60(3) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Articles 31 and 1045to 1047 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 13 and 19 of the Private Enforcement Act, Articles 2 and 3 of the Popular Action Act, and Articles 2, 5 and 6 of the Collective Actions Act.
On 14 March 2019, the Competition Authority (AdC) initiated proceedings PRC/2019/2 against the Portuguese Association of Private Hospitals (APHP), the Trofa Saúde Group, Hospital Privado da Trofa, Hospital Particular do Algarve (HPA), José de Mello Capital, CUF, Lusíadas SGPS, Lusíadas and Luz Saúde, on suspicion of anti-competitive practices.
According to the investigation, between October 2014 and March 2019, these private hospitals coordinated amongst themselves, with the involvement of the APHP, to fix prices and other commercial terms in negotiations with ADSE. They also threatened to suspend or terminate their agreements with ADSE to hinder the settlement of invoices for 2015 and 2016.
Instead of competing with one another, they acted in concert, which enabled them to increase their bargaining power vis-à-vis ADSE and, consequently, to impose higher prices and more favourabl . This type of coordination between competitors is prohibited by law.
This coordination resulted in an increase in the prices of private hospital healthcare services under the agreements with ADSE. These increases were paid for by ADSE beneficiaries through two mechanisms: an increase in monthly contributions and an increase in co-payments (amounts paid directly for consultations and treatments).
It is expected that this practice also led to an increase in the prices charged by other private hospitals with agreements with ADSE, as well as in the prices charged under other healthcare subsystems or health insurance schemes, and also in the prices charged to private patients.
On 30 June 2022, the AdC adopted a decision finding these companies liable for an infringement of Article 9(1)(a) and (b) of the Competition Law.
The companies appealed against this decision. The Court of Competition, Regulation and Supervision (TCRS), in case no. 398/22.0YUSTR, by judgment of 15 April 2024, declared the statement of objections null and void and ordered the case file to be returned to the AdC for a return to the investigation phase, due to issues relating to the gathering of evidence.
Subsequently, on 26 June 2025, the AdC issued a new statement of objections for infringement of Article 9(1)(a) and (b) of the Competition Law, limiting the period of the infringement to the years 2016 to 2019 and excluding José de Mello Capital from the targeted companies.
These practices caused harm to consumers, who paid higher prices than they would have done had there been no coordination between the hospitals. ADSE beneficiaries who used private hospitals were affected, as were, potentially, users of other healthcare systems, health insurance schemes or those who paid directly out of their own pockets.
The practices in question affected very significant sales volumes and market shares, and it is plausible that they caused harm to ADSE and consumers.
This class action represents all consumers resident in Portugal who received private hospital healthcare services in Portugal, not covered by the national health system, either privately and/or under a public or private healthcare subsystem (including ADSE, ADM, SAD-PSP, SAD-GNR and SAMS) or health insurance, between October 2014 and March 2019, as well as all beneficiaries of ADSE or another public or private healthcare subsystem (including ADM, SAD-PSP, SAD-GNR and SAMS) or health insurance who did not use healthcare services during the period in question.
Consumers do not need to take any action to be represented in the claim and to be entitled to compensation should the claim be successful (they will only need to claim their compensation at that time).
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 within the time limit to be set by the Court.
In summary, Ius Omnibus asks the Court to:
a) The Defendants be ordered to produce the documents listed in paragraph 920 of the statement of claim;
b) Determine which documents are strictly necessary to enable Ius to confirm and prove in court that Portuguese consumers have been harmed by the anti-competitive practices in question, and the amount of damages caused to them, and order the Defendants to produce them;
c) The Defendants be notified of Ius’s intention, on behalf of all the consumers it represents, to bring an action against the Defendants for compensation on behalf of consumers resident in Portugal affected by the anti-competitive practices in question, should it be confirmed that the homogeneous individual interests of Portuguese consumers have been harmed.
Consumers do not have to contact the Court or Ius Omnibus, but it may be in their interest to do so.
All consumers resident in Portugal who received private hospital healthcare services in Portugal, not covered by the national health system, either privately and/or under a public or private healthcare subsystem (including ADSE, ADM, SAD-PSP, SAD-GNR and SAMS) or health insurance, during the period between October 2014 and March 2019, as well as all beneficiaries of ADSE or another public or private healthcare subsystem (including ADM, SAD-PSP, SAD-GNR and SAMS) or health insurance who did not use healthcare services during the period in question.
If you do not wish to be represented, you must exercise your right to opt out.
Given that the purpose of this action is to obtain access to evidence, if you wish to be represented, no further action is required at this stage of the proceedings. Subsequently, should a claim for compensation be brought and proven successful, you may contact the entity designated by the competent court to claim the corresponding compensation.
However, if you wish to intervene in the proceedings in support of Ius Omnibus, you may do so within the time limit to be set by the Court.
All consumers represented in this case are invited to contact Ius Omnibus immediately so that their details can be recorded and they can be kept informed by Ius Omnibus of all developments in the case, ensuring that they do not miss the opportunity to claim compensation when the time comes. They can do so using the form available on this page.