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

[stephen25000]

We're debating whether Amaral will be granted an appeal.

Since he appears to have abandoned a central tenet and theme of his book, that ought to bode ill for his chances.

It does seem he will get an appeal.

So why are you so clearly worried ?

[ferryman]

We shall see in due course.

Indeed.

I take it the appeal has not been submitted yet?

Worried?

Who says it does seem he will get an appeal?

[Alice Purjorick]

We're debating whether Amaral will be granted an appeal.

Since he appears to have abandoned a central tenet and theme of his book, that ought to bode ill for his chances.

Why?

[stephen25000]

Indeed.

I take it the appeal has not been submitted yet?

Worried?

Who says it does seem he will get an appeal?

Try reading what Montclair has told us.

It would help.

[Montclair]

If she is obliged to send the appeal to the second court, what would be the point in her denying the appeal?

In that instance, she would, effectively, be denying, then allowing, the appeal, making a nonsense of her ever being asked to adjudicate an appeal in the first place.

What exactly is the point of the adjudication?

The appellant appeals to the first instance to give the judge an opportunity to change her verdict. If she does not want to change her verdict after reading his arguments, then she is obliged to send the appeal to the higher court. What do you think happened when the judge upheld the book ban in February 2010? All the defendants appealed to the first instance judge, who obviously did not change her verdict, and then she sent their appeals on to the Tribunal da Relação, as required by law, which then overturned the first judgement.

BTW, nobody was aware of when the appeals were submitted in 2010, so why are you worried now? I figure that Gonçalo's lawyers know what they are doing, just as they did before. I leave the arguments to the lawyers who know a lot about the law and about appeals.

[ferryman]

The appellant appeals to the first instance to give the judge an opportunity to change her verdict. If she does not want to change her verdict after reading his arguments, then she is obliged to send the appeal to the higher court. What do you think happened when the judge upheld the book ban in February 2010? All the defendants appealed to the first instance judge, who obviously did not change her verdict, and then she sent their appeals on to the Tribunal da Relação, as required by law, which then overturned the first judgement.

So an appeal followed by an appeal?

No I don't go with that at all ...

What you are suggesting is that the judge who ruled in first instance is empowered to overrule her own, initial ruling, which is clearly wrong.

[Montclair]

So an appeal followed by an appeal?

No I don't go with that at all ...

What you are suggesting is that the judge who ruled in first instance is empowered to overrule her initial ruling, which is clearly wrong.

That's your problem then. Perhaps this may help. Do you think that it is fair that a judge who has convicted you, should be the one to decide your appeal? No one would want that.

Yes, the judge can change her verdict whether you like it or not.

[Carana]

So there is no point in adjudication?

Adjudication? As far as I can work out, it's simply a matter of ensuring that the formalities, including relevant paperwork, are done properly.

What the next court may make of whatever arguments are presented remains to be seen.

[ferryman]

Adjudication? As far as I can work out, it's simply a matter of ensuring that the formalities, including relevant paperwork, are done properly.

What the next court may make of whatever arguments are presented remains to be seen.

So you are suggesting that there is no actual appeal: just a rubber-stamping exercise before proceedings in the next court up are commenced?

No.  I don't think that's right either.

It certainly isn't the impression I get from JP's posts.

[stephen25000]

So you are suggesting that there is no actual appeal: just a rubber-stamping exercise before proceedings in the next court up are commenced?

No.  I don't think that's right either.

It certainly isn't the impression I get from JP's posts.

Is up an expert in Portuguese Law,  or the interpretation of it ?

[G-Unit]

8. Appeal
 
8.1 Grounds for appeal
The general rule is that a party may appeal to the court of second instance (“Tribunal da Relação”) when the value of the lawsuit is higher than EUR5,000 and the decision is unfavourable to the appealing party in an amount higher than EUR2,500.01 (Cf. Article 629 of the CPC). The court of second instance decides both on legal and factual issues.

A party may appeal to the Supreme Court when the value of the lawsuit is higher than EUR30,000 and the decision is unfavourable to the appealing party in an amount higher than EUR15,000.01.

The Supreme Court only rules on legal issues and, in most cases, cannot revoke the second instance judgment concerning the proven facts.

In most cases the parties cannot move to the Supreme Court if the first and the second instance courts have issued identical decisions with similar grounds.

The general rule is that the appeal does not suspend the proceedings unless the appealing party pays a deposit or presents a bank guarantee.

8.2 Time limits and triggering events
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.
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/guide/practice-guides/location/241/6617/1422-200

[Carana]

So you are suggesting that there is no actual appeal: just a rubber-stamping exercise before proceedings in the next court up are commenced?

No.  I don't think that's right either.

It certainly isn't the impression I get from JP's posts.

It's more than rubber-stamping as the legal arguments / disputed facts have to be presented in a comprehensible manner. If anything appears as gibberish, the judge has a time limit to request clarification... it seems to be more a matter of streamlining the process.

[ferryman]

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.

So there it is.

The first instance court has power to reject an appeal ...

[stephen25000]

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.

So there it is.

The first instance court has power to reject an appeal ...

Now what did Montclair say earlier ?

[Carana]

8. Appeal
 
8.1 Grounds for appeal
The general rule is that a party may appeal to the court of second instance (“Tribunal da Relação”) when the value of the lawsuit is higher than EUR5,000 and the decision is unfavourable to the appealing party in an amount higher than EUR2,500.01 (Cf. Article 629 of the CPC). The court of second instance decides both on legal and factual issues.

A party may appeal to the Supreme Court when the value of the lawsuit is higher than EUR30,000 and the decision is unfavourable to the appealing party in an amount higher than EUR15,000.01.

The Supreme Court only rules on legal issues and, in most cases, cannot revoke the second instance judgment concerning the proven facts.

In most cases the parties cannot move to the Supreme Court if the first and the second instance courts have issued identical decisions with similar grounds.

The general rule is that the appeal does not suspend the proceedings unless the appealing party pays a deposit or presents a bank guarantee.

8.2 Time limits and triggering events
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.
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/guide/practice-guides/location/241/6617/1422-200

Thanks for digging that out again.

I'm wondering if there's a mistake in this bit as it doesn't make sense to me. Shouldn't it be "provided that" instead of "unless"?

The general rule is that the appeal does not suspend the proceedings unless the appealing party pays a deposit or presents a bank guarantee.

I don't find this clear either... At which point does the defendant's deadline start? It wouldn't make sense to me if it was before a submission had been cleared for appeal otherwise there's no way of knowing what to counter-contest.

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

By the time this gets sorted, I find it likely that it will be approaching summer recess time, then back to bird-flu season...