The HILTON case: lies, contradictions and doubts. - A novel in several episodes
- sosquintaingleses
- Jun 6
- 5 min read
Cascais City Council recently complied with the third and final court decision ordering it to hand over various documents requested by SOS Quinta dos Ingleses on 22 January 2024.
Episode I
On 7 May 2025, Carlos Carreiras told the municipal assembly, among other things, that ‘there was nothing to hand over’ and that the only thing the council was going to do was issue a statement saying just that: that the documents requested didn't exist.
[minut 2:16]
Ultimately, the CMC delivered nine documents (far more than that simple declaration), proving false what the still mayor said at that meeting.
Episode II
What immediately stands out from the documents handed over by the CMC is the fact that none of them are dated (except for a document from November 2022, from a meeting between Encosta da Parede and Turismo de Portugal, where no reference is made to the Hilton) and none contain a mechanographic number or the obligatory digital certification of the date on administrative documents. It is therefore impossible to know when the documents were inserted into the process.
Episode III
The documents now handed over by CMC show that:
a) The licence was granted for a 4-star development (and not a 5-star development, contrary to what CMC claimed).
b) The total number of accommodation units (rooms and tourist flats) in this development is impossible to know with certainty: the description contains three different numbers: 183, 198, and 214.
c) The hotel rooms will only be on floors zero and -1.
d) No document in the licensing process shows any link or connection between the Hilton chain and the development or its future management or operation.
e) The only reference to the ‘Hilton’ brand appears in an undated application by Encosta da Parede to obtain the 2.5 million exemptions that CMC granted Encosta da Parede for the project's ‘environmental certification’.
f) No environmental impact assessment has been carried out on this development.
g) No changes have been made to the existing REN strip on the land.
Episode IV
Destes documentos que a CMC forneceu agora resulta que:
a) What Miguel Pinto Luz said on 1 October 2019 is false: ‘Hilton is going to build a five-star hotel between Parede and Carcavelos, next to the waterfront.’ https://www.publituris.pt/2019/10/01/e-tudo-barato-em-portugal-temos-de-deixar-de-ser-o-pais-do-baratinho-e-ser-o-pais-da-qualidade. There is nothing to show that Hilton will be linked to it.
b) Although the CMC ‘sold’ the idea that this development would attract leading international hotel companies, the Hilton chain is not linked to it.
c) The rooms in the so-called ‘hotel’ will be very few (around 1/3) and will only be on floors zero and -1, i.e. the worst floors, the ones with the least economic value and the least views.
d) Almost all (and on all the floors with the best views) will be ‘tourist flats’.
e) The CMC has therefore basically licensed multi-million dollar flats, in a prime location, selling a plot of land for 312,000 euros, while ‘passing on’ the idea that it was a hotel (it isn't), an international chain (it isn't), that it would generate a lot of jobs (it won't) and be good for Cascais (it won't). It will only be good for Encosta da Parede.
Episode V
Another ‘curiosity’: throughout the almost year and a half (from 22 January 2024 to 30 April 2025) that the process of subpoenaing the documents that SOS Quinta dos Ingleses had requested lasted, CMC never said that the requested documents did not exist. On the contrary, as far as Hilton was concerned, it always said that it would not hand over these documents because they ‘concerned the internal life of companies’ and could reveal commercial secrets that SOS Quinta dos Ingleses had no right to access. It also added that these documents were not administrative documents and that it was not obliged to create documents (as if SOS Quinta dos Ingleses had defended this!).
The documents that have now been handed over show no link between the Hilton chain and the project.
If this is the case, why did CMC tell the court that it couldn't provide documents that don't exist? Do they exist or not? Or was this just an argument for delaying delivery, not telling the court the truth out of sheer bad faith, and allowing it to justify the many thousands of euros CMC paid in fees to Morais Leitão, always by private treaty?
Episode VI
The submitted documents also show that, fortunately, the APA and the CCDR-LVT do not seem to have authorised the exclusion of the REN requested by Miguel Pinto Luz. This indicates that, contrary to what Carlos Carreiras claimed in January 2024,
[minut 2:20]
that land is important as a national ecological reserve, due to its location and characteristics, and should never have been used to build this property development. In fact, how can the REN strip be made compatible with a project of this size? For the CMC, whether or not it is REN doesn't matter, even in areas that are highly susceptible in the event of a tsunami or flood.
Episode VII
Recently, on the day of the latest searches at CMC, Miguel Pinto Luz and Carlos Carreiras came out to say that the two expert valuations of the land sold by CMC gave it a value of 80,000 euros. As the case is a secret, we can't attach any documents that disprove them, but these claims are completely false.
[minut 01:00]
[minut 01:54]
Episode VIII
In addition, Carlos Carreiras repeatedly told the media that, in fact, the price paid for Encosta da Parede wasn't just 312,000 euros, because, in addition to the land, CMC had obliged the developer to pay another 4 million euros to Universidade Nova for the construction of the Nova Medical School, payments that would be made in instalments and that Encosta da Parede was complying with. These statements were later changed to be a parallel agreement, without CMC intervention, between Encosta da Parede and Universidade Nova.
1st doubt never clarified: Why should the developer pay an extra 4 million euros if the price paid for the land acquired from CMC had been the fair price?
2nd doubt never clarified: Why 4 million?
3rd doubt never clarified: Which Nova Medical School, if there is no officially operating school with that name and no building has been built to date?
4th doubt never clarified: Since the CMC is one of the members of the Alfredo de Sousa Foundation (which receives the donations made to Nova), isn't it obvious that this is a covert way of taking money from the CMC and giving it to Nova?
5th doubt never clarified: Why (apparently) was a substantial part of this money donated to an association that CMC created and is part of (AHED)?
Episóde IX
REN: Carlos Carreiras and Miguel Pinto Luz recently stated that nothing was built in a REN zone on the land of this development.
[minut 01:30]
However, it was precisely Miguel Pinto Luz who proposed at a town hall meeting the exclusion of the existing REN area on the land later sold to Encosta da Parede.
Given that this proposal dates back to 2022, when the licence had already been granted (the licence for Encosta da Parede dates from August 2019), why did Miguel Pinto Luz propose excluding the REN on that land? Why did Miguel Pinto Luz make this exclusion proposal when preparing to sell the land to Encosta da Parede? Was it to further increase the land's building capacity and benefit Encosta da Parede even more, so that it could build a few more flats? If there's nothing built in the REN zone, what other explanation is there for Miguel Pinto Luz's proposal, except to further benefit Encosta da Parede, which bought the land for 312,000 euros?
