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

[Jean-Pierre]

McCanns 'won' on a technicality, hardly justification for claiming they have in any way been vindicated! OR absolved in Maddies disappearance. I also wonder if the Jiudge made the claim so high in order that Amaral could appeal.

He can try asking for more time.  But as Angelo has pointed out above, the appellate courts impose strict time limits on the filing of appeals, for obvious reasons.

The judgement was quite clear, and I am not sure Amaral pleading to the court that it was only a technicality and therefore the rules don't apply would find much favour 

[ferryman]

Is, maybe, the header of this thread a little misleading?

He has confirmed he will apply for permission to appeal.

Hasn't he?

[Jean-Pierre]

Is, maybe, the header of this thread a little misleading?

He has confirmed he will apply for permission to appeal.

Hasn't he?

I don't know - it seems so, but it is third party comment. 

He has the right to appeal.  And has either until the 28th May or the 8th June to lodge his appeal for the court to consider. 

[ferryman]

I don't know - it seems so, but it is third party comment. 

He has the right to appeal.  And has either until the 28th May or the 8th June to lodge his appeal for the court to consider.

What I mean is that he doesn't have an automatic right to consider that his request to appeal will be accepted.

But he does have an automatic right to lodge the request.

Is that correct?

[Alice Purjorick]

                                Nothing at all to say about Mr Amaral's appeal?

I thought I had done?
Appeal processes are normal at law.
Which bit of : "whichever way it goes will not cause me to lose sleep or celebrate and whatever happens it will have no material effect on finding out what happened to the child or apprehending any guilty parties", do you fail to understand?
Amarals appeal etc is a side show to the main event

[Carana]

What I mean is that he doesn't have an automatic right to consider that his request to appeal will be accepted.

But he does have an automatic right to lodge the request.

Is that correct?

My understanding, FM, is that he can file his intention, follow it up with the grounds, etc., and unless it's patently vexatious or lacking in basic points, it should normally be passed on.

[Carana]

I don't quite understand the extent of his potential legal fees... isn't his daughter a lawyer? Or was that another myth?

[Alice Purjorick]

I don't think anyone is worrying Stephen.

Just wondering which reason Amaral will choose this time to try to spin out the time.   

"I am entitled to 40 days so I will use 40 days"; sounds reasonable to me.
Spinning it out would be if he asked for an extension to time. I don't suppose we will be too surprised if that happens. For someone down on his uppers he don't seem too perturbed about when his accounts will be "de-sequestered".

[Mr Gray]

"I am entitled to 40 days so I will use 40 days"; sounds reasonable to me.
Spinning it out would be if he asked for an extension to time. I don't suppose we will be too surprised if that happens. For someone down on his uppers he don't seem too perturbed about when his accounts will be "de-sequestered".

sounds reasonable to me too...however... I don't have to answer these stupid questions so I won't sounds unreasonable to many on here

[Brietta]

"I am entitled to 40 days so I will use 40 days"; sounds reasonable to me.
Spinning it out would be if he asked for an extension to time. I don't suppose we will be too surprised if that happens. For someone down on his uppers he don't seem too perturbed about when his accounts will be "de-sequestered".

I wouldn't imagine the Appeal Court would be too happy with proceedings being dragged out any longer than needs be ... as JP has pointed out because it is unfair to the successful litigants ... a delay may not be considered ... so it may be 'go for it or forget it'.

[Montclair]

Well JP, Whatever his reason he is entitled to ask for more time. McCanns 'won' on a technicality, hardly justification for claiming they have in any way been vindicated! OR absolved in Maddies disappearance. I also wonder if the Jiudge made the claim so high in order that Amaral could appeal.

Why would he need more time?He and his lawyers know perfectly well when they have to submit the appeal.

[Jean-Pierre]

"I am entitled to 40 days so I will use 40 days"; sounds reasonable to me.
Spinning it out would be if he asked for an extension to time. I don't suppose we will be too surprised if that happens. For someone down on his uppers he don't seem too perturbed about when his accounts will be "de-sequestered".

If that should be the case (and he does have form for trying to delay things) then he may well find its too late.

[Carana]

If that should be the case (and he does have form for trying to delay things) then he may well find its too late.

I can't see any reason to spin out getting an appeal registered... unfortunate incidents delaying the actual hearings in court might be a different issue.

[Alice Purjorick]

I wouldn't imagine the Appeal Court would be too happy with proceedings being dragged out any longer than needs be ... as JP has pointed out because it is unfair to the successful litigants ... a delay may not be considered ... so it may be 'go for it or forget it'.

I think you missed the point.
If 40 days is allowed to make a submission then there is no legitimate beef against all of the allotted time being used and no reasonable accusation of  spinning it out can be made. What do you think "you have 40 days from "x date" to make your submission" means?

[ferryman]

What would be helpful is to specify a date by which the appeal must be submitted, rather than a time-frame.

That removes uncertainty about weekends, bank holidays and all the rest, and makes absolutely clear what must be done and when by.