Gonçalo Amaral confirms he will appeal the damages decision to higher Court.

[DCI]

The following may clarify questions relating to time limits for appeal, and the process:

The general rule is that the appealing party has 30 days to appeal to the higher court in the event that the appeal is to the court of second instance (Cf. Article 638 of the CPC). If the appeal includes the impeachment of the proven facts through a review of the recorded witnesses or party statements, then the appealing party has 40 days to appeal.

However, in some specific cases (e.g. freezing orders) the appealing party has only 15 days to appeal.

The defendant in the appeal always has the same term to present an answer.

The first instance court will then decide whether the appeal should be accepted. If it is accepted, the case is sent to the higher court.

On the basis of historic evidence, it is estimated that the second instance courts take on average between six months and one year to decide an appeal, and that the Supreme Court will take on average three to six months to issue a final decision

__________

This means that there is a right to appeal, within a set timescale. 

The defendant in the appeal has a similar limited time to respond.

The first instance court will then decide on whether the appeal has merit and if it decides it has, the case is sent to the second instance court.   So although there is a right to appeal, that does not guarantee that the appeal will be heard in a higher court.

So Amaral is appealing an impeachment of proven facts, through a review of the recorded witness's or party statements?

[Carana]

What is puzzling you Carana?  I will have a go at answering.

I should have said "can't" be it... but I'm not sure. All the articles are out by about 200 in what I'm looking at... so that can't be right.

If I find a code with a date on it, that might help. I'll check to see if I find a different link and if I can't decipher the lusojuridicobabble, I'll come back to you if I may (not necessarily specifically about the appeal process).

[Jean-Pierre]

Look, you simply do not understand. Gonçalo Amaral will submit his appeal, it will be then heard (or read) by the Tribunal de Relação, who will study the case and make a ruling. Ponto final. GA does not have to wait for some authorisation to make an appeal. After the ruling by the TdR any of the parties can appeal that decision and it will go on and on...

The process is that the appealing party will submit his appeal within the given timescale to the court of first instance, who will rule on whether the appeal has merit.  The defendant party has a right to respond to the basis for appeal. 

If it is decide the appeal has merit, the court will refer the case to the court of second instance, (Tribunal de Relação) for the appeal to be heard with both parties represented. 

The reason for this overview by the lower court is to prevent the higher courts being clogged up by disgruntled losing parties bringing hopeless appeals.   

So there is a right to attempt an appeal, but no guarantee that the appeal will be heard.

[Alfred R Jones]

I don't do face book or tw..ter and wouldn't know where to look on the net as I am not a member of the "sceptic clan" which you seem to think exists and will end civilisation as you think it should be. I only came in here because "The McCann Files" was down for a couple of days and it gives the opportunity for a "bundle".
There are folk on both sides of any argument like this one, who really believe they will make a difference. I put it down to the desire to want to "belong".
Don't knock them; after all your presence is unlikely to be for reasons of altruism, this forum not being big enough to significantly change opinion in the round.

So,you're a lone wolf but that doesn't mean that there isn't a community of online" sceptics" (there clearly is) - I have never claimed however that they have the power to end civilisation.  I just think that they're a strange bunch that's all (witness the latest attempts to help Amaral with the Fiona Webster charity page - completely bonkers!)

[Jean-Pierre]

So Amaral is appealing an impeachment of proven facts, through a review of the recorded witness's or party statements?

I don't think we have any idea of the basis of any appeal. The appeal may be based on legal issues of proven facts (or both). 

[Alfred R Jones]

The process is that the appealing party will submit his appeal within the given timescale to the court of first instance, who will rule on whether the appeal has merit.  The defendant party has a right to respond to the basis for appeal. 

If it is decide the appeal has merit, the court will refer the case to the court of second instance, (Tribunal de Relação) for the appeal to be heard with both parties represented. 

The reason for this overview by the lower court is to prevent the higher courts being clogged up by disgruntled losing parties bringing hopeless appeals.   

So there is a right to attempt an appeal, but no guarantee that the appeal will be heard.

If there was an automatic appeal process (without any due consideration as Montclair is suggesting) then presumably EVERYBODY would appeal ANY decision against them...?

[Jean-Pierre]

If there was an automatic appeal process (without any due consideration as Montclair is suggesting) then presumably EVERYBODY would appeal ANY decision against them...?

Not necessarily every decision, because appeals involve costs and risks of an even worse outcome.  But in essence, yes.  That is why although there is a right to appeal, the lower court will triage appeals presented to ensure they have merit.

[DCI]

I don't think we have any idea of the basis of any appeal. The appeal may be based on legal issues of proven facts (or both).

Montclair said he had 40 days to appeal. Going by the time line and reasons, it seems that is his basis?

"The general rule is that the appealing party has 30 days to appeal to the higher court in the event that the appeal is to the court of second instance (Cf. Article 638 of the CPC). If the appeal includes the impeachment of the proven facts through a review of the recorded witnesses or party statements, then the appealing party has 40 days to appeal".

[Jean-Pierre]

Montclair said he had 40 days to appeal. Going by the time line and reasons, it seems that is his basis?

"The general rule is that the appealing party has 30 days to appeal to the higher court in the event that the appeal is to the court of second instance (Cf. Article 638 of the CPC). If the appeal includes the impeachment of the proven facts through a review of the recorded witnesses or party statements, then the appealing party has 40 days to appeal".

Possibly if this has been interpreted correctly. 

So if correct he will need to dispute one or more of the proven facts and set out reasons. 

by the by, if both the 1st and 2nd instance courts come to an identical judgement then there is no appeal to the Supreme Court, which can only rule on Legal basis.

[Alice Purjorick]

So,you're a lone wolf but that doesn't mean that there isn't a community of online" sceptics" (there clearly is) - I have never claimed however that they have the power to end civilisation.  I just think that they're a strange bunch that's all (witness the latest attempts to help Amaral with the Fiona Webster charity page - completely bonkers!)

I find both sides of the "extreme coin" weird but no weirder than a lot of other cults (for the want of a better term). The universal tribal principle that one person will swear black is white because a member of the other tribe said black is black is somewhat bizarre but people will do the daftest things. One can see examples of it on here most days; no names no packdrill.
The issue with Fiona Webster's charity page is no stranger than the recent episode on here about the Leicestershire police must be bent/incompetent/fill in as appropriate, because "The Dossier" did not result in prosecutions. Maybe the cops and CPS thought the dossier was vexatious crap only fit to light up a fire?

[faithlilly]

So,you're a lone wolf but that doesn't mean that there isn't a community of online" sceptics" (there clearly is) - I have never claimed however that they have the power to end civilisation.  I just think that they're a strange bunch that's all (witness the latest attempts to help Amaral with the Fiona Webster charity page - completely bonkers!)

Do you have a cite for that Alfie ?

[Montclair]

Taking into consideration the amounts involved, € 500.000,00 plus interest, Gonçalo Amaral has the automatic right to appeal, no authority can deny him that. By fining him that amount the judge forced Gonçalo Amaral to appeal, he has no other choice.

[Carana]

I'm curious... were no books ever sold in Brazil?

[Jean-Pierre]

Taking into consideration the amounts involved, € 500.000,00 plus interest, Gonçalo Amaral has the automatic right to appeal, no authority can deny him that. By fining him that amount the judge forced Gonçalo Amaral to appeal, he has no other choice.

It is not a fine, it is a award of damages. 

And yes, of course.  The barrier level for eventual appeal to the supreme court if a monetary amount of damages exceeds 15k euros.  He has the right to appeal, but the process involves demonstrating the grounds on which he intends to appeal.  If he cannot demonstrate legal or factual grounds then the appeal process will end there.

So he has until the 23rd May, or the 2nd June to lodge an appeal.

My prediction is that he will try to spin this out for as long as possible to put off the evil day.  I suspect his lawyer's secretary should be very careful     

[Alfred R Jones]

Do you have a cite for that Alfie ?

A cite for what?  I have already named the bonkers FB page on which this nonsense appears, surprised you're not a member tbh!