I suspect the confusion is between appeal and meta-appeal.
Amaral has an automatic right to a meta-appeal which is an appeal for the right to take the verdict of the court of first instance up to the next rung.
That will be heard and either accepted or rejected.
If it is rejected, the McCanns will be outright winners at first instance.
If it is accepted, then everything goes into limbo for however long until a date is set for Amaral's appeal to be heard.
Is that how it works?
Yes, more or less, but there's more to the process than that. From memory:
It's not clear how long the judge has to check through the appeal submission, but if clarification is required the appellant has 5 days to rectify / expand on the points.
If proof of payment isn't received, there's a reminder process for that.
The respondents have the same time limit as the appellant to submit their response. Although not clear in the wording, this deadline presumably starts once they have received a copy of the appeal. If the appellant has to present a rectification, then the respondents also have 5 days to check through the revised version.
(We're assuming a deadline of 30 days, but it can be 40 days if if involves material recorded or presented during the trial. If there is a transcript of the various testimonies, I don't see the need for locating precise moments in the videos - that would seem more logical in e.g., disputed cctv evidence of a car accident.)
