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

[Alfred R Jones]

Its clear for anyone to see, the judgement did not seek to prove defamation.  It will be an eye opener however as to what the appeal court make of it.

What were the damages awarded for?

[G-Unit]

As you well know the word libel was not mentioned once in the court proceedings.  The McCanns sought and won damages because of the injury Mr Amaral caused to their reputations.

Personally I cannot see how any judge could come to that decision without knowing the truth surrounding Madeleine's disappearance.

I guess if you think of it as happening in the UK, it was as if Redwood retired then wrote a book saying they had done it.

[mercury]

I guess if you think of it as happening in the UK, it was as if Redwood retired then wrote a book saying they had done it.

Well, thats never going to happen

 

unless he publishes shortly before he dies or if the Mccanns are ever found out to be actually involved (thats if he ever thought it in the first place)

[Angelo222]

What were the damages awarded for?

They were a claim for damages made by the McCanns as compensation for the embarrassment and trauma suffered by them following the publication of Mr Amaral's book and dvd.   Defamation does not feature once in the case.

[Alfred R Jones]

They were a claim for damages made by the McCanns as compensation for the embarrassment and trauma suffered by them following the publication of Mr Amaral's book and dvd.   Defamation does not feature once in the case.

do the words "embarrassment" and "trauma" feature in the ruling then?

[Angelo222]

do the words "embarrassment" and "trauma" feature in the ruling then?

Not as such but since you fail to understand the case I wanted to respond in terms you could understand my dear fellow.

[ferryman]

So no news of Amaral's appeal against the libel decision in favour of the McCanns, then?

Thought not ....

[stephen25000]

So no news of Amaral's appeal against the libel decision in favour of the McCanns, then?

Thought not ....

Has the appeal result been given ?

[Angelo222]

So no news of Amaral's appeal against the libel decision in favour of the McCanns, then?

Thought not ....

Such an important matter requires careful thought and consideration ferryman, you wouldn't want them to come to the wrong conclusion would you.

[Miss Taken Identity]

So no news of Amaral's appeal against the libel decision in favour of the McCanns, then?

Thought not ....

AH  HERE IT IS...

So no news of Amaral's appeal against the libel decision in favour of the McCanns, then?

Thought not ....

was there a libel case in Portugal?

IF there was a discision it would be to most peoples astonishment because I do no recall a libel case taking place.

The only court case I recall was for pursuit of money claimed by Kate n Gerry and in their three children's names, ( the fate of one was/is unknown).

They cliamed the books content hurt them and caused them ain and suffering. The judge did ask if it was worse than their child being  missing and  well, the answer was yes. make of that what you will.

However, the judgement was that some of the contents of the book would have caused some upset for the parents.

On that  note it is worth remembering:
 IF the parents are innocent of hiding their daughters body, they would quite rightly be raging beyond belief.
IF  the parents did make  their daughter disappear, they would be raging to be under suspicion because they tried so hard to hide /cover up their involvement; so either way they were going to be 'affected' by the book.

On another note:  their reputation was in tatters in the eyes of many anyway, once the truth came out about their behaviour.

Now we have to look at the luvvies comments because they seem to be of the opinion that Amarals book content as indeed causing more pain than their daughters disappearance. Amaral proved that they enjoyed a 'celebrity lifestyle' which they would never have had if their daughter had not 'disappeared'... and to claim money on behalf of their 'missing' daughter saying his book affected her was/IS an abomination,  and a measure of their greed and love of money. I would feel Their daughter's plight and their involvment of it ( leaving her alone every night) would have caused  little Maddie much more pain- but the luvvies will no doubt disagree.
   

[Alfred R Jones]

Not as such but since you fail to understand the case I wanted to respond in terms you could understand my dear fellow.

but by your logic because the word "libel" does not feature in the judgment it wasn't a libel trial, so what was it then?  Damages were awarded for what breach of the law?  Is it against the law to cause embarrassment?  Is there a specific law against causing trauma to another? Trauma as a result of what specific cause or action?

[Alice Purjorick]

Has anyone a copy of the original writ? That will state what the damages are for.
But perm anything you like form this lot:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/damages

[ferryman]

AH  HERE IT IS...

was there a libel case in Portugal?

IF there was a discision it would be to most peoples astonishment because I do no recall a libel case taking place.

The only court case I recall was for pursuit of money claimed by Kate n Gerry and in their three children's names, ( the fate of one was/is unknown).

They cliamed the books content hurt them and caused them ain and suffering. The judge did ask if it was worse than their child being  missing and  well, the answer was yes. make of that what you will.

However, the judgement was that some of the contents of the book would have caused some upset for the parents.

On that  note it is worth remembering:
 IF the parents are innocent of hiding their daughters body, they would quite rightly be raging beyond belief.
IF  the parents did make  their daughter disappear, they would be raging to be under suspicion because they tried so hard to hide /cover up their involvement; so either way they were going to be 'affected' by the book.

On another note:  their reputation was in tatters in the eyes of many anyway, once the truth came out about their behaviour.

Now we have to look at the luvvies comments because they seem to be of the opinion that Amarals book content as indeed causing more pain than their daughters disappearance. Amaral proved that they enjoyed a 'celebrity lifestyle' which they would never have had if their daughter had not 'disappeared'... and to claim money on behalf of their 'missing' daughter saying his book affected her was/IS an abomination,  and a measure of their greed and love of money. I would feel Their daughter's plight and their involvment of it ( leaving her alone every night) would have caused  little Maddie much more pain- but the luvvies will no doubt disagree.
   

What dross is this?

If learned Portuguese judges had found Amaral's book to be true, or at the very least, not proven untrue, they would have invited the McCanns to poke their suffering, and would have found in favour of Amaral.

They didn't, because they found huge swathes of Amaral's book to be proven untrue, and to traduce the reputations of the McCanns.

[Angelo222]

What dross is this?

If learned Portuguese judges had found Amaral's book to be true, or at the very least, not proven untrue, they would have invited the McCanns to poke their suffering, and would have found in favour of Amaral.

They didn't, because they found huge swathes of Amaral's book to be proven untrue, and to traduce the reputations of the McCanns.

Not true ferryman.  Only Maddie and the perp(s) if there was(were) one(any) know the truth even now.  A judge cannot be expected to rule on the truthfulness of a book when even the cops are mystified.

Could be the courts are delaying coming to a conclusion in the hope that Britain's finest once and for all solve the mystery.  l wouldn't hold my breath though.

[G-Unit]

Has anyone a copy of the original writ? That will state what the damages are for.
But perm anything you like form this lot:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/damages

Admitting that I know nothing about Portuguese law, the damages awarded in this case seem more like punitive damages to me. Rather than compensating the McCanns the judge seemed to be punishing Amaral for using his position and failing to uphold the presumption of innocence which that position required of him.

punitive damages, which are awarded not to compensate a plaintiff for injury suffered but to penalize a defendant for particularly egregious, wrongful conduct.