Lisbon, Aug. 26, 2026 (Lusa) - The Portuguese Ride-Hailing Association (APTAD) highlighted on Wednesday «a serious error» in Law 59/2026 on the ride-hailing scheme, published in the Diário da República on Tuesday, arguing that it favours the platforms at the expense of operators and drivers.
«Following the publication (…) of Law No. 59/2026, which amends the legal framework for ride-hailing, APTAD has detected a serious and objectively verifiable error in the new legislation, which could have a direct impact on thousands of operators and drivers,» Ivo Fernandes told the Lusa news agency.
According to the APTAD president, «this is not a matter of interpretation: it is poor legislative drafting with a direct impact on thousands of operators and drivers».
According to the APTAD president, the issues stem from «two contradictory dates of entry into force», given that «Article 7 of the main body of the law stipulates that it shall enter into force on 1 September 2026 (the first day of the month following publication). However, Article 33 of the annex – the republication, which the Act declares to be an ‘integral part' – specifies 1 November (the third month following publication)».
«The same Act states, on the same day, two incompatible things», he noted.
Fernandes also highlighted the presence of «two misaligned transitional regimes», noting that Article 4 of the main body of the law «primarily protects the platforms, giving Uber and Bolt 120 days and up to one year to adapt» and that the adaptation period for operators, drivers and the Institute for Mobility and Transport (IMT) itself (60/120 days, extendable to 180) «is only set out in Article 32 of the annex — the original article of Law 45/2018, which has not been amended».
For Ivo Fernandes, the legal clarification «exacerbates the problem», as the legal experts consulted by the association confirmed that Article 7 takes precedence.
«But then, for the sake of consistency, Articles 32 and 33 of the annex cease to apply (they applied to the 2018 Act), and the only transitional regime that protected operators and drivers disappears,» he explained.
For Ivo Fernandes, there are «seven days to comply with new obligations (QR-code and anti-fraud security stickers, new certificates, new rules on vehicle allocation), without any time to adapt, and without the 30- and 180-day grace periods that the IMT would have».
«It is not difficult; it is impossible, because the State has not done its bit. The law comes into force by referring to regulations that do not exist,» he claimed, citing the example of the new badge, which depends on a ministerial order defining the model, security features and fee (Article 12(15)) and which has not yet been published.
He also pointed out that another ministerial order relating to the certification of drivers regarding training, assessment and certificates (Article 10(12)) remains unpublished.
Furthermore, the IMT's data-sharing platform (Article 20-A), which is mandatory to join, «has yet to be built and depends on a technical ministerial order that is still in development».
«The State requires private operators, on pain of an administrative offence, to immediately comply with obligations that it has not yet regulated itself. As of 1 September, those working in the sector will be in breach not through negligence, but because the accompanying legislation is missing. How is the IMT supposed to implement this in seven days? It cannot,» he stated.
For Ivo Fernandes, the law's asymmetry «says it all», given that «generous deadlines are set out in the main body of the law and protect the platforms. The regime that allowed time for small operators and drivers was relegated to an annex whose validity is now being called into question. It is a snapshot of who was listened to and who was overlooked».
Ivo Fernandes also argued that there is a «flaw in the quality of the legislation», emphasising that «a piece of legislation cannot have two dates of entry into force, nor two transitional regimes that contradict one another, nor can it make the legal certainty of a sector dependent on a retrospective interpretation of which of its articles applies».
«Whoever drafted this did not read what they approved – or read it and failed to realise what impact it would have on the lives of those working in the sector,» he said.
Law No. 59/2026, of 25 August, amends the previous Law No. 45/2018 on the activity of paid passenger transport in vehicles booked via electronic platforms, which will now be designated the ride-hailing scheme, according to the decree.
Among the most significant changes in the new law, and the one that has sparked the most discussion, is the integration of the taxi sector, as these vehicles may be «registered for ride-hailing operations, provided they meet the requirements applicable to vehicles used for this activity and are registered with a licensed electronic platform operator».
RCP/ADB // ADB.
Lusa
