The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[stephen25000]

the one that kept all amarals assets frozen...that one

No davel, the ones that overturned the book ban

[Mr Gray]

No davel, the ones that overturned the book ban

The only heraingl that amaral has managed to win is the one where the other side didn't bother to contest and didn't turn up. even so the judgement in this case kept all his assets frozen... I wonder why

[Mr Gray]

You have proof of that ?

proof of what...his assets are still frozen
It was an exparte judgement...the other side didn't attend...so yes tahts proof

[stephen25000]

proof of what...his assets are still frozen
It was an exparte judgement...the other side didn't attend...so yes tahts proof

I wasn't talking about his assets davel.

I was talking about the overturning of the book ban whicg occurred over several hearings and which Duarte of course refused to return the books, which were already common knowledge.

As to 'making money' that's exactly what the mccanns have done from the serialization rights in the sun. Gross to say the least,

[Mr Gray]

I wasn't talking about his assets davel.

I was talking about the overturning of the book ban whicg occurred over several hearings and which Duarte of course refused to return the books, which were already common knowledge.

As to 'making money' that's exactly what the mccanns have done from the serialization rights in the sun. Gross to say the least,

So amaral won when the other side didn't show and his assets are still frozen

As I have said we all realise how difficult it is to win a libel trial in Portugal so it will be a massive victory for the McCanns if they win

[stephen25000]

So amaral won when the other side didn't show and his assets are still frozen

As I have said we all realise how difficult it is to win a libel trial in Portugal so it will be a massive victory for the McCanns if they win

and if they don't.......................

up shitte creak without a paddle.

Can you prove the mccanns weren't represented in those hearings ?

and if true, I await on that, because they knew they would lose ?

[Mr Gray]

and if they don't.......................

up shitte creak without a paddle.

Can you prove the mccanns weren't represented in those hearings ?

and if true, I await on that, because they knew they would lose ?

Do you understand what EX Parte means...you don't seem to understand the basics

If the McCanns lose....as they have now been declared not suspects....it really wont make a lot of difference,

[stephen25000]

Do you understand what EX Parte means...you don't seem to understand the basics

If the McCanns lose....as they have now been declared not suspects....it really wont make a lot of difference,

]

You haven't answered the question davel.

[Cornelius]

Do you understand what EX Parte means...you don't seem to understand the basics

If the McCanns lose....as they have now been declared not suspects....it really wont make a lot of difference,

We do!

[Mr Gray]

We do!

could you explain it to stephen

[stephen25000]

could you explain it to stephen

Don't worry davel, I understand.

[ferryman]

So will learned Portuguese judges be hauling Mrs Justice Hogg into their presence to demand an explanation of how, in strict accordance with the provisions of English law, she could have had the temerity to make Madeleine a ward of court?

[carlymichelle]

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
1 Jun 2014



Judge rules that Kate and Gerry McCann do not possess the authority to sue Gonçalo Amaral in their daughter’s name.


The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”.

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates.


 

[carlymichelle]

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html?m=1

[icabodcrane]

...  and another thing

This trial has been on hold for six months

During that time the McCanns and their lawyers  knew  that the reason for the trial being suspended was because their right to represent Madeleine's interests in court had been brought into question

They have,  therefore,  had six months to obtain and present to the Judge the documentation she is now allowing them 30 days to submit

It's become a farce