The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[Luz]

Oh no it doesn't.

Oh yes it does. According to the Portuguese Constitution the Freedom of Expression is a fundamental right equivalent to the Personality Rights (that include image, good name, status, etc). They cannot overcome one another, but if a set of judges in the Supreme Court considered that the Right to Express his ideas was not colluding with the McCann's Rights of Personality, than Gonçalo Amaral's book, the VC DVD, GP publishers and TVI documentary are not libeled for defamation.

What the McCann are attempting is a specificity of the civil law that is called "civil responsibility" for damages suffered, and that can be applied even if there was no intention to harm.

In synthesis, what the McCann are trying to get is MONEY, plain and simple.

[Rogerandout]

Oh yes it does. According to the Portuguese Constitution the Freedom of Expression is a fundamental right equivalent to the Personality Rights (that include image, good name, status, etc). They cannot overcome one another, but if a set of judges in the Supreme Court considered that the Right to Express his ideas was not colluding with the McCann's Rights of Personality, than Gonçalo Amaral's book, the VC DVD, GP publishers and TVI documentary are not libeled for defamation.

What the McCann are attempting is a specificity of the civil law that is called "civil responsibility" for damages suffered, and that can be applied even if there was no intention to harm.

In synthesis, what the McCann are trying to get is MONEY, plain and simple.

If that were the case, there would be no libel law in Portugal. What is the current trial about then?

British Libel Law is similar- it is a civil, not criminal action.

[Luz]

If that were the case, there would be no libel law in Portugal. What is the current trial about then?

British Libel Law is similar- it is a civil, not criminal action.

This trial is about Civil Compensation, not Libel. That was the previous one that was won by Amaral.

In Portugal defamation is a crime. Nevertheless that is often mixed with Civil Law because what people search is compensation. Usually both, the criminal defamation and compensation are tried together, but in this case it was separate, so what we have now is the second half of the "Libel Trial", the civil compensation.

Since there was no crime, as determined by the carious instances of the previous Trial process, this attempt to gain a compensation has to be based on very objective facts that there was a damage suffered.

When I say objective I mean material but also, for instance, psychological if testified by a recognized expert, expected gains that were lost if certified by an economy or accounts expert, etc....

[Benita]

This trial is about Civil Compensation, not Libel. That was the previous one that was won by Amaral.

wrong again Luz  8-)(--)

[Redblossom]

wrong again Luz  8-)(--)

Hark at the "legal expert"
 

[Rogerandout]

What is Libel Law if it is not about civil compensation for defamation?

[Mr Gray]

This trial is about Civil Compensation, not Libel. That was the previous one that was won by Amaral.

In Portugal defamation is a crime. Nevertheless that is often mixed with Civil Law because what people search is compensation. Usually both, the criminal defamation and compensation are tried together, but in this case it was separate, so what we have now is the second half of the "Libel Trial", the civil compensation.

Since there was no crime, as determined by the carious instances of the previous Trial process, this attempt to gain a compensation has to be based on very objective facts that there was a damage suffered.

When I say objective I mean material but also, for instance, psychological if testified by a recognized expert, expected gains that were lost if certified by an economy or accounts expert, etc....

 you have made it very clear with your posts that you have no understanding of Portuguese law or what is happening at the moment...feel free to dream on

[Jean-Pierre]

Oh yes it does. According to the Portuguese Constitution the Freedom of Expression is a fundamental right equivalent to the Personality Rights (that include image, good name, status, etc). They cannot overcome one another, but if a set of judges in the Supreme Court considered that the Right to Express his ideas was not colluding with the McCann's Rights of Personality, than Gonçalo Amaral's book, the VC DVD, GP publishers and TVI documentary are not libeled for defamation.

What the McCann are attempting is a specificity of the civil law that is called "civil responsibility" for damages suffered, and that can be applied even if there was no intention to harm.

In synthesis, what the McCann are trying to get is MONEY, plain and simple.

Am I correct in assuming that you are basing your argument on article 37 of the Portuguese Constitution -  paragraphs 1 and 2, Luz?

1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship

[jassi]

Hark at the "legal expert"
 

We can have as many legal 'experts' as we like on here and none of it counts for anything, only that of the judge is important.

[Rogerandout]

Am I correct in assuming that you are basing your argument on article 37 of the Portuguese Constitution -  paragraphs 1 and 2, Luz?

1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship

But that is just the concept of 'no prior restraint'. People shall not be stopped from expressing their views, but if that view is defamatory, then it may be actionable in civil law.

[Luz]

you have made it very clear with your posts that you have no understanding of Portuguese law or what is happening at the moment...feel free to dream on

Well I will have to warn my Professors that all they taught me is rubbish, according to some internet experts on portuguese law.

By the way, one of my Professors was someone you know, the ex-minister that appeared in a TV documentary about this case: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/11/cmtv-maddie-case-special-and-rua-segura.html

I love to be called ignorant by persons that never worked in the system, as I have, for much  more than a decade.

[Luz]

Am I correct in assuming that you are basing your argument on article 37 of the Portuguese Constitution -  paragraphs 1 and 2, Luz?

1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship

Absolutely right.

[Redblossom]

We can have as many legal 'experts' as we like on here and none of it counts for anything, only that of the judge is important.

Exactly, cant wait..though its dragging into 2014.....still, all good thngs come to those that wait........lets hope its an end to the wicked vexatious litigation and attempts at destroying  a man....and wanting a million quid for doing so as well, couldnt make this torrid shit up....


 

[Luz]

For those experts on libel laws in Portugal:

1. Why have no questions been posed about the contents of the documents (book, DVD & documentary) and its faithfulness about the facts, but only liminar references to it?
2. Why did the judge's and lawyers' questions focused on the possible harm suffered by the McCann family and not whether if the book or video were defamatory?
3. why did the judge dismissed any question that questioned (sorry for redundancy) the book's, DVD or documentary contents?!

This is not a Defamation Trial, it's a civil compensation, which in my opinion reveals the real spirit of the McCann: they are not worried about the impact of the book, as they never were or they would have tried to stop it at the beginning, but they are after whatever profit it made after a success for years.

Greedy bs.

[Jean-Pierre]

Absolutely right.

Of course Luz.  However, as you will aware - that is not the whole of article 37.  It goes on to say:

3. Infractions committed in the exercise of these rights are subject to the general principles of the criminal law or the law governing administrative offences, and the competence to consider them shall pertain to the courts of law or an independent administrative entity respectively, as laid down by law.

4. Every natural and legal person shall be equally and effectively ensured the right of reply and to make corrections, as well as the right to compensation for damages suffered.

Which is the problem for Amaral.