2020)¶

Jurisdiction: Portugal · Citation: Código Civil art. 1906 (Lei n.º 61/2008, alterado pela Lei n.º 65/2020) · Authoritative source: diariodarepublica.pt — CC

The exercício das responsabilidades parentais (exercise of parental responsibilities) framework in Portuguese family law. CC art. 1906 was substantially reformed by Lei 61/2008 (which renamed poder paternal to responsabilidades parentais and established the joint-exercise default) and further amended by Lei 65/2020 (which expressly codified the residência alternada — alternating residence — framework).

The provisions parallel: - Spain Código Civil arts. 92+154+156 (custodia compartida) - Italy CC arts. 337-bis to 337-octies (affidamento condiviso) - Greece AK arts. 1510+1513+1518+1520 (synepimeleia post N.4800/2021) - France CC arts. 372-373 (autorité parentale conjointe)

Portugal is doctrinally distinctive among Mediterranean jurisdictions because the 2008 reform was the first in southern Europe to expressly codify exercício conjunto (joint exercise) as the post-divorce default, and the 2020 reform (Lei 65/2020) further reinforced the framework with express residência alternada codification and welfare-protective safeguards.

Verbatim text (current consolidated, post Lei 65/2020)¶

Art. 1906 CC — Exercício das responsabilidades parentais em caso de divórcio, separação judicial de pessoas e bens, declaração de nulidade ou anulação do casamento¶

1. As responsabilidades parentais relativas às questões de particular importância para a vida do filho são exercidas em comum por ambos os progenitores nos termos que vigoravam na constância do matrimónio, salvo nos casos de urgência manifesta, em que qualquer dos progenitores pode agir sozinho, devendo prestar informações ao outro logo que possível.

2. Quando o exercício em comum das responsabilidades parentais relativas às questões de particular importância para a vida do filho for julgado contrário aos interesses deste, deve o tribunal, através de decisão fundamentada, determinar que essas responsabilidades sejam exercidas por um dos progenitores.

3. O exercício das responsabilidades parentais relativas aos atos da vida corrente do filho cabe ao progenitor com quem ele reside habitualmente, ou ao progenitor com quem ele se encontra temporariamente; porém, este último, ao exercer as suas responsabilidades, não deve contrariar as orientações educativas mais relevantes, tal como elas são definidas pelo progenitor com quem o filho reside habitualmente.

4. O progenitor a quem cabe o exercício das responsabilidades parentais relativas aos atos da vida corrente pode exercê-las por si ou delegar o seu exercício.

5. O tribunal determinará a residência do filho e os direitos de visita de acordo com o interesse deste, tendo em atenção todas as circunstâncias relevantes, designadamente o eventual acordo dos pais e a disponibilidade manifestada por cada um deles para promover relações habituais do filho com o outro, bem como, no que respeita à residência, a possibilidade de fixação de residência alternada relativamente aos períodos que o filho passa com cada um dos progenitores.

6. Quando corresponder ao superior interesse da criança e ponderadas todas as circunstâncias relevantes, o tribunal pode determinar a residência alternada do filho com cada um dos progenitores, independentemente de mútuo acordo nesse sentido e sem prejuízo da fixação da prestação de alimentos.

7. Ao progenitor que não exerça, no todo ou em parte, as responsabilidades parentais assiste o direito de ser informado sobre o modo do seu exercício, designadamente sobre a educação e as condições de vida do filho.

8. O tribunal decidirá sempre de harmonia com o interesse do menor, incluindo o de manter uma relação de grande proximidade com os dois progenitores, promovendo e aceitando acordos ou tomando decisões que favoreçam amplas oportunidades de contacto com ambos e de partilha de responsabilidades entre eles.

English working translation¶

Art. 1906 CC — Exercise of parental responsibilities in case of divorce, judicial separation of persons and property, declaration of nullity, or annulment of marriage¶

1. Parental responsibilities concerning matters of particular importance (questões de particular importância) for the child's life are exercised jointly (em comum) by both parents under the terms that were in force during the marriage, except in cases of manifest urgency, where either parent may act alone, and must provide information to the other as soon as possible.

2. Where the joint exercise of parental responsibilities concerning matters of particular importance is judged contrary to the interests of the child, the court must, by reasoned decision, determine that those responsibilities be exercised by one of the parents.

3. The exercise of parental responsibilities concerning the acts of the child's everyday life belongs to the parent with whom the child habitually resides, or to the parent with whom the child is temporarily; however, the latter, in exercising his/her responsibilities, must not contradict the most relevant educational guidelines defined by the parent with whom the child habitually resides.

4. The parent to whom the exercise of parental responsibilities concerning the acts of everyday life belongs may exercise them himself/herself or delegate the exercise.

5. The court shall determine the residence of the child and the visiting rights (direitos de visita) in accordance with the interest of the child, taking into account all relevant circumstances, in particular the eventual agreement of the parents and the availability shown by each of them to promote habitual relations of the child with the other parent, as well as, in respect of residence, the possibility of fixing alternating residence (residência alternada) for the periods the child spends with each parent.

6. Where it corresponds to the superior interest of the child and all relevant circumstances considered, the court may determine the alternating residence of the child with each of the parents, independently of mutual agreement in this regard, and without prejudice to the fixing of maintenance.

7. The parent who does not exercise, in whole or in part, parental responsibilities has the right to be informed about the manner of their exercise, in particular about the education and living conditions of the child.

8. The court shall always decide in harmony with the interest of the minor, including that of maintaining a relationship of great proximity with both parents (manter uma relação de grande proximidade com os dois progenitores), promoting and accepting agreements or taking decisions that favor ample opportunities of contact with both and the sharing of responsibilities between them.

Why this matters for PA¶

The joint-exercise default for particular-importance matters (subsection 1). Exercidas em comum por ambos os progenitores nos termos que vigoravam na constância do matrimónio. Joint exercise under the terms that were in force during the marriage. This is doctrinally distinctive — the 2008 reform expressly preserves the constância do matrimónio (marriage-time) joint-exercise framework after divorce. The structural Portuguese starting point is: divorce does not displace joint exercise of particular-importance matters; the alienating parent cannot lawfully decide unilaterally on schooling, healthcare, foreign travel, etc.
The questões de particular importância scope. Although not enumerated in art. 1906 itself, Portuguese jurisprudence defines particular-importance matters to include: religion, foreign travel/residence, school choice, surgery/healthcare, contact with extended family. In PA-pattern cases this scope provides structural defence against alienating-parent unilateral decisions on enumerated matters.
The urgency exception with information duty (subsection 1 second clause). Em que qualquer dos progenitores pode agir sozinho, devendo prestar informações ao outro logo que possível. In urgent cases either parent may act alone, must provide information to the other as soon as possible. The information duty (devendo prestar informações) operates as a structural information-sharing duty even in emergency contexts.
The fundamentada-decision requirement for sole exercise (subsection 2). Através de decisão fundamentada. Where joint exercise is judged contrary to the child's interests, the court must determine sole exercise by reasoned decision. The reasoning requirement is operationally important — appellate review can engage where reasoning is insufficient.
The non-contradiction duty for the non-resident parent (subsection 3). Não deve contrariar as orientações educativas mais relevantes, tal como elas são definidas pelo progenitor com quem o filho reside habitualmente. The non-resident parent must not contradict the most relevant educational guidelines set by the resident parent. This is doctrinally important in two directions:
It protects the resident parent's day-to-day decisions from being unilaterally overridden during contact time
In PA-pattern cases where the targeted parent is the non-resident parent, this prevents the alienating parent from claiming that targeted-parent disagreement on minor matters constitutes lawful breach
The five-factor residence determination (subsection 5). The court considers:
The eventual agreement of the parents (parental agreement, if any)
Disponibilidade manifestada por cada um deles para promover relações habituais do filho com o outro — willingness shown by each parent to promote habitual relations of the child with the other parent
Possibilidade de fixação de residência alternada — possibility of alternating residence
The disponibilidade … para promover relações factor is doctrinally explicit — sustained alienating conduct demonstrates a structural deficit in this welfare-relevant factor. This is the Portuguese express version of the friendly-parent / cooperative-parent factor.
The court-ordered alternating residence without mutual agreement (subsection 6). Pode determinar a residência alternada … independentemente de mútuo acordo nesse sentido. The court may determine alternating residence independently of mutual agreement. This is the doctrinally distinctive Lei 65/2020 reform — alternating residence does not require parental consent. In PA-pattern cases this is structurally important: the alienating parent's opposition does not foreclose alternating residence; the court can order it where it corresponds to the superior interest of the child.
The information right of the non-exercising parent (subsection 7). Tem o direito de ser informado sobre o modo do seu exercício, designadamente sobre a educação e as condições de vida do filho. Even where parental responsibilities have been (in whole or in part) attributed to one parent, the other has the right to be informed about education and living conditions. This provides structural information access even in apex-tier remedy scenarios — preventing total parental disconnection.
The grande proximidade welfare-anchor (subsection 8). O tribunal decidirá sempre de harmonia com o interesse do menor, incluindo o de manter uma relação de grande proximidade com os dois progenitores. The court always decides in harmony with the interest of the minor, including that of maintaining a relationship of great proximity with both parents. The grande proximidade (great proximity) framing is doctrinally distinctive — it codifies the both-parent-relationship interest as a component of the welfare standard, not as a counter-consideration. The structural Portuguese parallel to:
Austrian § 138 (1) Z 9 verlässliche Kontakte
Greek art. 1520 ευρύτερη επικοινωνία
Finnish HOL § 1 myönteiset ja läheiset ihmissuhteet
The court-action duty for facilitation (subsection 8). Promovendo e aceitando acordos ou tomando decisões que favoreçam amplas oportunidades de contacto com ambos e de partilha de responsabilidades entre eles. The court promotes and accepts agreements or takes decisions that favor ample opportunities of contact with both and the sharing of responsibilities between them. This is doctrinally distinctive — codifying an active court duty to favor contact-with-both and responsibility-sharing. In PA-pattern cases this provides express anchor for proactive court intervention.

Procedural application¶

The competent court is the Tribunal de Família e Menores (Family and Juvenile Court) or, in non-urban areas, the Juízo de Família e Menores of the Tribunal de Comarca
Proceedings under Regime Geral do Processo Tutelar Cível (RGPTC, Lei 141/2015) — non-contentious framework
Equipa Multidisciplinar de Assessoria Técnica aos Tribunais (EMAT) provides multidisciplinary welfare assessment
The child is heard under RGPTC art. 35 — capacity-based standard, no fixed age threshold
Mediação familiar is structurally available under Lei 29/2013
Appellate review to the Tribunal da Relação + cassation to the Supremo Tribunal de Justiça

Use in alienating-conduct cases¶

The Supremo Tribunal de Justiça has applied the interesse da criança + grande proximidade framework in PA-pattern cases — see STJ 4/2024 acórdão de uniformização
The Lei 65/2020 reform's residência alternada sem mútuo acordo operates as a structural PA-pattern remedy — the court can order alternating residence over the alienating parent's opposition
Where alienating conduct is established, Portuguese courts can:
First-tier: order mediação familiar under Lei 29/2013
Second-tier: fix specific direitos de visita arrangements under subsection 5
Third-tier: order residência alternada under subsection 6 (no parental consent required)
Apex-tier: shift residence + restrict exercise of responsibilities (subsection 2 sole-exercise determination)
The subsection 5 disponibilidade para promover relações factor provides express anchor for treating sustained alienating conduct as engaging the residence-determination framework
The subsection 8 grande proximidade welfare anchor provides foundation for ordering structural protections against alienating conduct