ECHR urge McCanns to reach friendly settlement with Gonçalo Amaral.

[barrier]

We know that the SC has got things wrong in the past so it's possible they have this time. It will be interesting to see what happens... From looking a t other cases involving articles 8 and 10 I think they have a very strong case

But is it 8 and 10.


https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2257195/17%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-207898%22]}

Document Type
Communicated Case
Title
MCCANN ET HEALY c. PORTUGAL
App. No(s).
57195/17
Importance Level
3
Respondent State(s)
Portugal
Conclusion(s)
Affaire communiquée
Affaire communiquée
Article(s)
6
6-2
8
8-1
Keywords
(Art. 6) Right to a fair trial
(Art. 8) Right to respect for private and family life
Date
14/01/2021

[Vertigo Swirl]

Not so sure, this is worth a read imo, but its a blogger's view.

https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/11/14/strasbourg-courts-new-non-contentious-phase-a-tax-on-lawlessness/

It’s certainly worth a read and exposes some serious concerns about the ECHR’s apparent willingness to brush human rights transsgressions under the carpet for the sake of an easier life. 

“ In our experience of the Court’s conduct of the new non-contentious phase concerning cases involving particularly grave or systemic abuses, it is not acting in the interests of human rights; it is not even operating as a compensation mechanism, but is merely facilitating the disposal of cases by expediting a tax on lawlessness.”

[Mr Gray]

Not so sure, this is worth a read imo, but its a blogger's view.

https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/11/14/strasbourg-courts-new-non-contentious-phase-a-tax-on-lawlessness/

It's an extremely good read

[Mr Gray]

But is it 8 and 10.


https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2257195/17%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-207898%22]}

Document Type
Communicated Case
Title
MCCANN ET HEALY c. PORTUGAL
App. No(s).
57195/17
Importance Level
3
Respondent State(s)
Portugal
Conclusion(s)
Affaire communiquée
Affaire communiquée
Article(s)
6
6-2
8
8-1
Keywords
(Art. 6) Right to a fair trial
(Art. 8) Right to respect for private and family life
Date
14/01/2021

For the McCanns it 8...but their rights interfere with amarals rights under 10...so it's a balance between 8 and 10....and there's plenty of ECHR case law to look at

[Robittybob1]

There was never any chance of that happening.  Amaral's Book is Libellous.

So it could look like a friendly win gesture then.

[G-Unit]

For the McCanns it 8...but their rights interfere with amarals rights under 10...so it's a balance between 8 and 10....and there's plenty of ECHR case law to look at

Their application doesn't seem to have mentioned Article 10. Perhaps that's because they are complaining about the Portuguese authorities breaching their human rights, not about Amaral doing so.

[Mr Gray]

Their application doesn't seem to have mentioned Article 10. Perhaps that's because they are complaining about the Portuguese authorities breaching their human rights, not about Amaral doing so.

They have no reason to mention 10...Im giving the background to the case. The McCanns have rights under 8..the SC thought amarals rights under 10 were more important. The ECHR have produced an extensive report on cases involving the balance between the two

[barrier]

There was never any chance of that happening.  Amaral's Book is Libellous.

Where can a legal judgement be read expressing that view ?.

[G-Unit]

Where can a legal judgement be read expressing that view ?.

The opinion of judges means nothing, it seems. The book must be libelous because the McCanns said so.

[Eleanor]

The opinion of judges means nothing, it seems. The book must be libelous because the McCanns said so.

Perhaps I should have said Libellous in English Law.  But since conversation was to do with Amaral's Book not being printed and put on sale by a British Publisher in Britain in English that I didn't at the time see the need.

Perhaps you all would like some discourse on why Amaral's Book is or isn't Libellous in Britain.

[Vertigo Swirl]

The opinion of judges means nothing, it seems. The book must be libelous because the McCanns said so.

And what if the ECHR find in favour of the McCanns, what will that mean wrt the opinion of Portuguese judges?

[Vertigo Swirl]

libel - a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation. 
So either prove that the statements in Amaral's book are true, or accept that they damage the McCanns' reputation, or do you suppose that being accused of hiding your daughter's body after you've over-sedated her isn't damaging to your reputation?

[G-Unit]

libel - a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation. 
So either prove that the statements in Amaral's book are true, or accept that they damage the McCanns' reputation, or do you suppose that being accused of hiding your daughter's body after you've over-sedated her isn't damaging to your reputation?

According to Maria Emília de Melo e Castro the book expressed Amaral's opinion, his thesis, his hypothesis. Why should he not be allowed to express his opinion?

[Mr Gray]

According to Maria Emília de Melo e Castro the book expressed Amaral's opinion, his thesis, his hypothesis. Why should he not be allowed to express his opinion?

He can't express a defamatory opinion in the UK

[Eleanor]

According to Maria Emília de Melo e Castro the book expressed Amaral's opinion, his thesis, his hypothesis. Why should he not be allowed to express his opinion?

Not in The UK he can't.