Private Wealth Disputes 2026 Comparisons

Portugal does not have a standalone probate or family court system comparable to those found in some common-law jurisdictions. Private wealth disputes are heard within the ordinary judicial courts of first instance, with jurisdiction allocated according to the nature of the matter.

Although Portugal has family and minors courts (Juízos de Família e Menores), their competence is strictly limited to divorce, parental-responsibility matters, adoption and other child-related issues. They do not handle succession, probate, adult-capacity matters, or financially complex private-wealth disputes.

Succession and probate disputes, including estate administration and partition, fall within the civil courts (Juízos Cíveis).

When disputes involve businesses or corporate-governance issues, these generally proceed before the commercial courts (Juízos de Comércio), which have specialised jurisdiction over company-law matters.

Trust litigation remains uncommon because Portuguese substantive law does not recognise domestic trusts. Nevertheless, Portuguese courts may adjudicate issues involving foreign trusts, primarily for conflict-of-laws purposes.

Adult-capacity and guardianship proceedings (such as the appointment of an administrator or guardian for an adult deemed incapable) are also handled by the civil courts, not by the family courts.

Arbitration is available for certain private wealth disputes, provided the rights at stake are “disposable” under Portuguese law. Matters involving family status, capacity, succession validity and forced heirship cannot be submitted to arbitration, as they involve non-waivable rights. However, patrimonial disputes directly arising from these situations (such as the liquidation and partition of assets) are, in principle, arbitrable.

Mediation is widely encouraged, especially in family and inheritance disputes, and may be court annexed. Agreements reached through mediation can be converted into enforceable judicial titles once approved by a judge. Arbitration awards are binding and enforceable as court judgments, as are mediation agreements reached in public mediation systems.

Portugal follows a partial cost-shifting system. The losing party must generally pay the court costs and a portion of the prevailing party’s legal fees (the “custas de parte”). However, the recoverable amounts are capped by statutory schedules and usually cover only a small fraction of the actual attorneys’ fees.

Portugal does not recognise trusts as domestic legal institutions. However, when a dispute involves a foreign trust governed by a law that allows payment of litigation costs from the trust fund, Portuguese courts may accept such allocations, provided they are valid under the applicable foreign law and necessary for the protection or administration of the trust.

This capped-costs regime significantly shapes litigation strategy, often encouraging negotiated solutions and discouraging overly aggressive procedural tactics.

Parties may be inclined to litigate in Portugal where there is a meaningful connection to the jurisdiction, such as assets located in the country, the domicile of one of the parties, or matters falling within the Portuguese courts’ exclusive jurisdiction – including disputes relating to rights in rem over immovable property situated in Portugal. In practice, forum choice is often shaped by the predictability of Portuguese procedural law and by the application of conflict-of-law rules under the Portuguese Civil Code and the EU Succession Regulation, both of which provide a relatively stable and transparent legal framework.

Limitation periods can also play a decisive role. Portugal maintains some comparatively long prescription periods – including a residual 20-year period for certain contractual and property claims – which may make the jurisdiction attractive in cases where similar claims could already be time-barred elsewhere. As a result, the Portuguese forum can present a strategically advantageous option, particularly in cross-border private wealth disputes.

Portuguese civil procedure is largely conducted in writing, although evidentiary hearings are concentrated in a single, oral trial session. Notwithstanding that it is for the parties to submit all evidence they deem relevant to the proceedings, judges adopt an active case-management approach, frequently intervening to clarify disputed issues and, where necessary, ordering the production of essential evidence.

Injunctive relief is widely available and constitutes a central tool in private wealth litigation, often used to preserve assets, prevent dissipation, or suspend corporate resolutions. In this context, parties commonly seek precautionary measures such as freezing orders over bank accounts or preventive annotations on real estate, ensuring that any final judgment remains effective and enforceable.

Portugal does not recognise broad common-law-style discovery. Instead, parties may only request the production of specific, identified documents, and must demonstrate their relevance to the dispute. Generalised or exploratory requests – so-called fishing expeditions – are not permitted.

The narrow scope of document production can make it more challenging to uncover concealed assets, financial arrangements or evidence of undue influence, which are frequent issues in private wealth disputes. As a result, parties often rely heavily on targeted third-party information requests, including to banks, land and commercial registries, and other public authorities, to obtain the evidence necessary to support or defend their claims.

In the absence of broad discovery mechanisms, evidence in Portugal is primarily developed through party submissions, the production of documents, witness testimony, expert opinions and official records. Courts may order the disclosure of specific documents and can compel third parties, including financial institutions, the Banco de Portugal, tax authorities, and public registries, to provide information when necessary to establish the relevant facts.

Public notarial records and the land and commercial registries play a central evidentiary role, as they benefit from public faith and constitute highly reliable documentation in family, succession and property matters.

Attorney–client privilege is strongly protected in Portugal. Lawyers are bound by strict statutory confidentiality obligations, which cover legal advice, litigation strategy and all client communications. Privilege belongs to the client and, under Portuguese law, cannot be waived without the prior authorisation of the Bar Association, as professional secrecy is deemed mandatory and not freely renounceable.

Other relevant confidentiality regimes include medical secrecy, which frequently arises in capacity or undue-influence disputes, and financial or banking secrecy. While both are protected by law, courts may order their disclosure where strictly necessary for evidentiary purposes, particularly in cases involving asset tracing or preservation.

Wills may be challenged on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud, coercion or failure to comply with formal execution requirements. Testamentary capacity is presumed under Portuguese law, and the burden lies with the challenger to demonstrate that incapacity or a defect in consent existed at the precise moment the Will was executed.

Successful challenges typically rely on robust evidence, including medical and psychiatric records, witness testimony, particularly from those present at the execution, and retrospective expert evaluations assessing the testator’s mental state. Formal defects may also be invoked, although public Wills benefit from a presumption of notarial regularity that must be overcome by convincing evidence.

Challenges to a Will are brought through declaratory actions before the civil courts, seeking either annulment or a declaration of nullity depending on the defect alleged. The claimant must clearly set out the specific grounds of invalidity and submit the initial supporting evidence, which commonly includes medical records, witness testimony, and any contemporaneous documentation.

When testamentary capacity is in dispute, courts frequently appoint medical or psychiatric experts to undertake a retrospective assessment of the testator’s mental state at the moment of execution. Where allegations of forgery arise, forensic handwriting and document examinations are routinely ordered. Although public Wills executed before a notary benefit from a presumption of authenticity, this presumption may be rebutted with sufficiently persuasive evidence.

Portuguese law does not expressly regulate in terrorem or “no-contest” clauses. Their validity is debated in legal scholarship; however, Portuguese courts generally consider such provisions incompatible with the mandatory nature of the forced-heirship regime and with public-policy principles protecting access to justice. Consequently, these clauses are unlikely to be enforced and do not prevent heirs from bringing legitimate challenges to a Will.

That said, the Portuguese forced-heirship system still allows the testator to freely dispose of a portion of the estate. Within the limits of this freely disposable share, certain no-contest clauses may be adopted, provided they do not infringe the statutorily protected rights of forced heirs.

Powers of attorney in Portugal should be granted as a precaution against any potential decline in capacity, but they may only be executed while the individual is still mentally capable of understanding and freely consenting to their terms. As a rule, a power of attorney remains valid until a court formally determines the grantor’s supervening incapacity and withdraws their powers of administration or representation. Once such a decision is rendered, the mandate terminates automatically, ensuring legal certainty and preventing unauthorised acts.

Portuguese law, however, recognises an important exception: powers of attorney granted also in the interest of the attorney-in-fact or of a third party (“mandates in the agent’s interest”) do not terminate upon the grantor’s supervening incapacity, even if a court later issues a capacity ruling. These mandates function as irrevocable powers and remain effective unless specifically annulled or restricted by the court.

Generally, powers of attorney are extinguished upon the death of the grantor. However, irrevocable powers of attorney granted in the interest of the attorney or a third party may exceptionally survive the grantor’s death, to the extent necessary to safeguard the relevant legally protected interest.

Family businesses in Portugal are predominantly structured through private limited liability companies (sociedades por quotas) and holding companies, including SGPS (Sociedade Gestora de Participações Sociais) vehicles, which are widely used by high-net-worth families for their tax efficiency and for separating asset management from operational risks. Larger or more complex family groups may also adopt sociedades anónimas to facilitate governance, capital structuring or access to external financing.

Succession planning frequently relies on shareholder agreements and customised governance mechanisms to regulate voting rights, share transfers and the composition of management bodies. These are often paired with lifetime transfers, such as inter vivos donations, frequently with reserved usufruct, to anticipate wealth distribution while preserving control over the business. All such strategies must operate within Portugal’s mandatory forced-heirship regime, which significantly shapes both ownership and governance design. Well-drafted shareholders’ agreements, including variable quorum requirements, lock-up periods and deadlock-resolution mechanisms, can help ensure continuity by favouring heirs with the aptitude and willingness to manage the business over those less qualified or disengaged.

These structures may nonetheless give rise to disputes, particularly regarding control of the company, valuation and liquidation of shares, the collation of lifetime gifts, and tensions between usufructuaries and bare owners. Conflicts concerning the validity of corporate resolutions or the exercise of shareholder rights are addressed through civil courts or specialised commercial courts. Increasingly, arbitration and mediation are also used, offering more efficient, discreet and flexible means of resolving intra-family and corporate disputes.

Portugal does not recognise domestic trusts; however, foreign trusts, private foundations and similar asset-holding vehicles may be recognised for asset-segregation purposes, provided they are valid under their governing law and comply with Portuguese conflict-of-law rules.

Portuguese private international law applies the law of the deceased’s nationality to govern succession. Accordingly, a foreign national residing in Portugal may choose the law of their nationality to govern their estate, provided the choice is made in a valid Will.

For Portuguese nationals, or for individuals who elect Portuguese law to govern their succession, these structures cannot override Portugal’s mandatory succession rules, including the forced-heirship regime. Transfers that infringe these mandatory shares may be reduced or deemed partially ineffective.

Moreover, asset segregation will not be upheld where a transfer is treated as a fraudulent conveyance, namely if assets were moved into a trust, foundation or similar vehicle with the intention of prejudicing existing creditors. In such cases, creditors may seek clawback under Portuguese law.

As a result, the protective value of such structures is highly dependent on their compliance with applicable conflict-of-law rules and on the absence of any creditor-defrauding purpose. Where legitimately constituted, foreign trusts and foundations can provide effective segregation of assets; however, their robustness is significantly limited for individuals whose succession is governed by Portuguese law and remains subject to forced-heirship constraints.

A divorcing spouse may challenge transfers made into family wealth structures where such transfers prejudice marital rights, particularly under community-property regimes. Portuguese courts may set aside transactions that improperly remove assets from the marital estate, including contributions to holding companies, gifts to descendants, or transfers considered fraudulent or dissipatory.

Prenuptial agreements are recognised and frequently used in high-net-worth families to protect family businesses and to elect a separation-of-property regime; where no prenuptial agreement is executed, the default matrimonial property regime is that of community of acquisitions (comunhão de adquiridos).

However, postnuptial agreements altering the marital property regime are not permitted under Portuguese law. The marital property regime is, as a rule, immutable after marriage, and spouses cannot modify it by private agreement. Limited statutory exceptions exist, such as judicial separation of property in cases of mismanagement, but these do not operate as freely negotiable postnuptial arrangements.

It is also important to note that, under Portuguese law, a divorcing spouse is not entitled to maintain the standard of living previously enjoyed during the marriage. Spousal maintenance is exceptional, strictly needs-based, and typically modest, often aligning with the national minimum wage. This does not affect child support: children are entitled to benefit from the parents’ economic capacity, and when they reside primarily with the less wealthy parent, the other parent must contribute in proportion to their financial means.

One basic preventive strategy is for spouses to marry under a separation-of-property regime. However, this protection may be limited when spouses jointly acquire real estate, provide joint guarantees for bank financing or business loans, or incur personal liability in contexts involving strict or objective liability (such as certain accidents or torts).

In practice, practitioners rely on a combination of corporate structuring, asset segregation, and prenuptial agreements to minimise exposure of family wealth to creditor claims. Once a creditor claim arises, defence strategies focus on demonstrating that any asset transfers were made for legitimate economic purposes, were supported by adequate consideration, and did not render the debtor insolvent.

A central element of the defence is rebutting allegations of fraudulent conveyance, which requires showing that the transaction did not prejudice creditors and that the transferee acted in good faith. Meticulous documentation, proof of solvency at the time of transfer, and the use of formalised corporate vehicles are key tools in resisting such challenges.

Because Portugal has no domestic trust regime, fiduciary disputes generally arise from foreign trusts recognised under the Hague Convention, or from contractual agency relationships.

Beneficiaries can bring claims against fiduciaries based on principles of breach of duty, mismanagement, or failure to act in accordance with the governing instrument. Portuguese courts resolve these claims by applying the foreign law designated as applicable to the fiduciary relationship, under the principles of contractual liability (for breach of agency/mandate duties) or tort law (for extra-contractual damages), ensuring that the obligations imposed by the foreign governing law are upheld.

Third parties may bring claims against fiduciaries in Portugal when the fiduciary’s conduct, whether through negligence, misrepresentation or acting beyond the scope of their authority, causes direct damage to the third party. These claims are typically grounded in extra-contractual (tort) liability, as there is usually no contractual link between the fiduciary and the injured party.

Common situations include negligent management of assets, unauthorised or ultra vires acts, financial misrepresentations, or property damage resulting from the fiduciary’s actions. Where the fiduciary acts without proper authority, Portuguese law may impose personal liability on the fiduciary towards the third party. In cases involving foreign trustees recognised under the Hague Trust Convention, third-party claims are assessed in accordance with the law governing the trust, subject to Portuguese public policy considerations.

Piercing the veil of a foreign trust, foundation or comparable structure is possible in Portugal where the arrangement is used to perpetrate fraud or to circumvent mandatory rules, such as forced heirship. While exoneration or limitation-of-liability clauses may afford some contractual protection to fiduciaries, they cannot exclude liability for wilful misconduct or gross negligence.

Delegation of specific functions, such as investment management, to qualified third-party professionals is recognised and may limit fiduciary exposure, provided the delegation is authorised by the governing trust instrument or fiduciary contract. However, the original fiduciary remains responsible for the diligent selection and oversight of the delegate.

Portugal applies a strict forced-heirship regime that reserves two-thirds of the estate for the compulsory heirs, namely descendants and, in many cases, the surviving spouse. Only one-third of the estate constitutes the freely disposable portion. The surviving spouse’s share varies depending on the composition of the family, but Portuguese law does not grant the spouse a fixed minimum of 25% of the estate; rather, the spouse’s position depends on whether there are descendants or ascendants, in accordance with the Civil Code.

As a rule, forced-heirship rights cannot be waived during the lifetime of the future deceased, and contracts intended to predetermine succession rights are generally void. A prenuptial agreement may regulate the marital property regime but cannot waive forced-heirship entitlements.

However, once the succession has opened, heirs may freely enter into consensual arrangements, such as accepting the allocation of assets into a foreign trust or similar vehicle, provided their mandatory shares are fully respected. In this context, post-death agreements among heirs, including settlement arrangements or asset-partition agreements, are permissible and frequently used.

Succession disputes in Portugal frequently arise in connection with the valuation of lifetime gifts, actions for reduction to restore the forced-heirship portion, and the interpretation or validity of testamentary dispositions. When heirs cannot reach agreement, both courts and notaries responsible for the partition process must reconstruct the hereditary estate, determine the extent of the reserved portion and, where necessary, reduce excessive gifts or reallocate assets to ensure that all mandatory quotas are respected. These proceedings are often complex and heavily fact-dependent, particularly when resolving issues of valuation, collation and the interaction between inter vivos transfers and the forced-heirship regime.

Relocating assets abroad does not, in itself, avoid Portuguese forced heirship rules. For individuals habitually resident in Portugal, the applicable law to the entirety of the succession is, as a general rule, Portuguese law under the EU Succession Regulation, regardless of where the assets are located. Conflicts may arise where non-EU jurisdictions apply their own lex situs or refuse to enforce foreign forced-heirship rights on public-policy grounds, making cross-border co-ordination particularly complex.

The most effective avoidance mechanism is the choice-of-law provision (professio iuris) under the EU Succession Regulation, which allows an individual to select the law of their nationality to govern their entire estate. If the chosen law does not contain forced-heirship rules, Portuguese mandatory shares can be lawfully circumvented. Other mitigation measures (such as lifetime gifts or corporate structuring) offer only partial protection, as inter vivos transfers may remain subject to collation and reduction if they prejudice the reserved portion.

Portugal does not levy inheritance or gift tax between spouses, descendants or ascendants. For example, a grandparent may make a gift or bequest to a grandchild without taxation.

Gifts or inheritances made to other relatives, unrelated individuals or entities are subject to Stamp Duty at a rate of 10%, and lifetime gifts of real estate are additionally subject to 0.8% Stamp Duty on the property transfer.

The Portuguese tax authorities play a central role in supervising private wealth, particularly through the enforcement of Stamp Duty rules which require the mandatory reporting of all gratuitous transfers – including exempted transfers between close relatives. Compliance is monitored through administrative inspections, audits and, in serious cases, criminal investigations relating to tax fraud, fraudulent conveyance or money laundering.

Gatekeepers such as lawyers, accountants, tax advisers and fiduciaries are increasingly targeted in civil and regulatory oversight. Under Portugal’s strict anti-money laundering (AML) framework, these professionals are subject to enhanced due-diligence duties, mandatory verification of beneficial ownership, and the filing of Suspicious Transaction Reports with the Financial Intelligence Unit. Although professional privilege protects lawyers in the exercise of purely legal defence or representation, they are required to report suspicious transactions when involved in transactional or advisory work falling within the scope of AML obligations.

Criminal liability may arise not only for the principal offender but also for any party who facilitates offences such as tax fraud, money laundering, asset concealment or the falsification of documents used to perpetrate fraud. Under Portuguese law, liability is based on intentional conduct: gatekeepers, including lawyers, accountants and fiduciaries, may face prosecution as co-perpetrators or accomplices where they knowingly assist in structuring arrangements designed to commit tax or financial crimes.

Negligent breaches of regulatory or administrative duties typically give rise to administrative sanctions rather than criminal liability. However, intentional participation, or acceptance of the risk that their conduct contributes to criminal wrongdoing, triggers full criminal responsibility. Professional secrecy rules protect lawyers engaged in purely legal representation, but do not shield conduct that amounts to participation in a criminal offence.

Portugal allows private criminal prosecutions in respect of “private crimes”, where criminal proceedings depend not only on a complaint by the victim but also on the victim filing a private accusation. This mechanism also applies in certain semi-public crimes relevant to private wealth disputes, such as simple fraud or offences involving misappropriation or disloyal administration of assets.

In these cases, the Public Prosecutor will only proceed if a complaint is filed, and for private crimes the victim must actively lead the prosecution as a private accuser. This system coexists with the public prosecution regime and gives the victim a higher degree of involvement and procedural control, particularly in disputes arising from intra-family asset mismanagement or financial misconduct.

Cross-border wealth disputes in Portugal frequently involve questions of tax residency, reporting obligations and the co-ordination of information relating to assets held in multiple jurisdictions. Portuguese authorities co-operate extensively with foreign tax administrations through the EU Directive on Administrative Cooperation (DAC) and global frameworks such as the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) for the automatic exchange of financial account information.

This high level of co-operation enables the Portuguese tax authorities to obtain worldwide information on bank accounts and financial assets, which is essential for determining tax liability and for resolving international succession matters under the EU Succession Regulation. The main enforcement challenges arise when assets or individuals are located in non-cooperative jurisdictions or in countries with limited bilateral assistance, where asset tracing, recovery and judicial co-operation remain slow and complex.

Portuguese law does not recognise a formal reformation procedure equivalent to the rectification mechanisms found in common-law jurisdictions. Instead, courts may engage in judicial interpretation or correct manifest clerical mistakes, but always within the strict limits of the testator’s proven intention. Ambiguous, inconsistent or defectively drafted provisions may be interpreted, and obvious errors in description or drafting may be corrected, provided that the true intention of the testator can be clearly established from intrinsic or extrinsic evidence.

However, Portuguese courts are strictly prohibited from altering the substance of a testamentary disposition: they cannot change beneficiaries, adjust shares or otherwise substitute their own judgment for the testator’s Will. Errors committed during estate administration or in the partition process are handled through judicial oversight, corrective orders or annulment actions brought by interested parties.

Portugal does not recognise the Hastings-Bass rule or any similar doctrine allowing fiduciaries to unwind discretionary decisions solely because they produced unintended consequences. Instead, the ability to reverse a fiduciary act depends on the general rules governing the validity of legal acts or on fiduciary liability.

A discretionary act may be set aside if the underlying legal transaction is invalid, for example, due to error, lack of authority, fraud, coercion, or violation of essential limits imposed by the governing instrument. Acts that exceed the fiduciary’s powers (abuse of powers) or that involve a deviation from the purposes of the mandate may also be deemed ineffective. Where the act remains legally valid, a breach of fiduciary duties (including negligent or disloyal administration) does not undo the act but may give rise to contractual or tort liability.

Wealth disputes in Portugal are shaped by strong cultural expectations of family cohesion and the equal treatment of descendants. These values are mirrored in the legal framework, particularly in the strict forced heirship regime, which limits the freedom to disinherit close family members and ensures broadly equal distribution among children.

Culturally, there is a preference for negotiated outcomes rather than adversarial litigation, especially in inheritance and family disputes. Resorting to court is often perceived as a breakdown of family unity. Accordingly, judges, notaries and legal practitioners routinely encourage settlement, conciliation and mediation during succession and partition proceedings, aiming to preserve long-term relationships while resolving the underlying asset conflict.

In recent years, Portugal has seen a marked increase in disputes challenging succession-planning arrangements, largely driven by the rigidity of its forced heirship regime. Litigation frequently arises in the context of blended families, allegations of incapacity or undue influence, and complex asset structures, often involving family businesses, corporate restructurings or hard-to-value assets.

The growing international profile of Portuguese high-net-worth individuals has also led to a significant rise in cross-border succession and tax disputes, particularly in cases involving the EU Succession Regulation, conflicts of law, or the recognition of foreign trusts and foundations. Courts are increasingly required to assess whether such structures infringe mandatory heirship rights.

Looking ahead, further growth is expected in disputes involving global reporting regimes, challenges to asset-protection arrangements, and heightened AML and compliance scrutiny of professional gatekeepers, who face increased liability exposure in multi-jurisdictional wealth planning.