Madeleine McCann made a 'Ward of Court' by English Judge.

[icabodcrane]

So, in your opinion, what position does that put Amaral in with regard to his allegations, if the Judge considers the parents cannot take action on behalf of a possible living child?

I don't understand what you mean misty

The Judge has decided that only Madeleine's legal guardians can represent her interests

Isn't that what has happened here  ? 

Kate and Gerry McCann  are  not   Madeleine's legal guardians  and, therefore,  are not permitted to represent her  in court

Is that not correct  ?

[icabodcrane]

Come to think of it,  why didn't any of the  top-notch lawyers on the McCann payroll  tell them that, legally,  they had no right to bring this action   ? 

[Silkywhiskers]

Come to think of it,  why didn't any of the  top-notch lawyers on the McCann payroll  tell them that, legally,  they had no right to bring this action   ?

Right ahead of you.

As if Amaral's lawyer didn't know this from the get go.

All I can think is - suddenly someone needs a reason to suspend/delay the trial.

[misty]

I don't understand what you mean misty

The Judge has decided that only Madeleine's legal guardians can represent her interests

Isn't that what has happened here  ? 

Kate and Gerry McCann  are  not   Madeleine's legal guardians  and, therefore,  are not permitted to represent her  in court

Is that not correct  ?

If Madeleine is dead, surely the WOC status is legally terminated as it only refers to the LIFE of the child? Perhaps someone with the relevant qualifications could clarify this.
If the Judge is accepting that Madeleine may still be alive, she is directly opposing the claims made by Amaral in his book, making him guilty of libel. Don't you agree?

[Silkywhiskers]

If Madeleine is dead, surely the WOC status is legally terminated as it only refers to the LIFE of the child? Perhaps someone with the relevant qualifications could clarify this.
If the Judge is accepting that Madeleine may still be alive, she is directly opposing the claims made by Amaral in his book, making him guilty of libel. Don't you agree?

Are you serious?

The issue is a simple legal one, are they able to legally represent Madeleine or are they not?

What the heck has that got to do with what happened and if she's alive or not?  At the stage the judge made this decision, no one knows!

Bizarre (and wishful) thinking.

[Martina]

If Madeleine is dead, surely the WOC status is legally terminated as it only refers to the LIFE of the child? Perhaps someone with the relevant qualifications could clarify this.
If the Judge is accepting that Madeleine may still be alive, she is directly opposing the claims made by Amaral in his book, making him guilty of libel. Don't you agree?

Legally Madeleine McCann was not declared dead, there is no death certificate of hers, so she is treated as if she was alive. But it has nothing to do with the potential libel claims, AFAIK.

[misty]

Are you serious?

The issue is a simple legal one, are they able to legally represent Madeleine or are they not?

What the heck has that got to do with what happened and if she's alive or not?  At the stage the judge made this decision, no one knows!

Bizarre (and wishful) thinking.

It is an important legal point as far as I am concerned. If she is dead, what is the situation regarding the WOC status & who is legally able to represent her interests? If the McCanns had applied to have her declared dead under the 7 year ruling, who would be her legal representatives in those circumstances?
You are contradicting yourself, in that you have agreed the Judge may be considering Madeleine is still alive.

[Silkywhiskers]

It is an important legal point as far as I am concerned. If she is dead, what is the situation regarding the WOC status & who is legally able to represent her interests? If the McCanns had applied to have her declared dead under the 7 year ruling, who would be her legal representatives in those circumstances?
You are contradicting yourself, in that you have agreed the Judge may be considering Madeleine is still alive.

Clearly you don't have a legal mind.

A decision on WOC status does not depend on whether the WOC is alive or not.  A WOC may be in an irreversable coma in a hospital.

A decision on WOC status weighs the application of whoever applies for that status, in this case THE MCCANNS.

If the McCanns have applied for, and received, WOC status for their missing daughter, it is totally IRRELEVANT whether she is alive or dead or in a coma.

What is relevant is if the  the McCanns ability to take legal action on behalf of said WOC.

In this case, apparently, it's EITHER have Madeleine declared a WOC (which they did) OR sue for libel on her behalf.  They can't have it both ways, finally.

[icabodcrane]

It is an important legal point as far as I am concerned. If she is dead, what is the situation regarding the WOC status & who is legally able to represent her interests? If the McCanns had applied to have her declared dead under the 7 year ruling, who would be her legal representatives in those circumstances?
You are contradicting yourself, in that you have agreed the Judge may be considering Madeleine is still alive.

I'm sorry misty,  I'm not getting the point you're trying to make

 This decision by the Judge relates to the legal  issue of the McCanns  being prohibited from  representing  Madeleine's interests in court  ...   by virtue of the fact that they are not her legal guardians

That's what this is about,  isn't it  ?

For the life of me I can't understand why the McCanns' lawyers didn't warn them that was the case

[misty]

Clearly you don't have a legal mind.

A decision on WOC status does not depend on whether the WOC is alive or not.  A WOC may be in an irreversable coma in a hospital.

A decision on WOC status weighs the application of whoever applies for that status, in this case THE MCCANNS.

If the McCanns have applied for, and received, WOC status for their missing daughter, it is totally IRRELEVANT whether she is alive or dead or in a coma.

What is relevant is if the  the McCanns ability to take legal action on behalf of said WOC.

In this case, apparently, it's EITHER have Madeleine declared a WOC (which they did) OR sue for libel on her behalf.  They can't have it both ways, finally.

Someone in an irreversible coma is still legally alive.
I understand that the Judge, at the 11.59th hr, has to be sure that the parents are legally permitted to make a claim for damages on Madeleine's behalf. But the point is - the WOC refers to LIFE - not DECEASED (as Amaral claims her to be) - so perhaps someone who does know about legally dead "WOCs" could provide a definitive answer for me (even if you don't think it's important at all)

[misty]

I'm sorry misty,  I'm not getting the point you're trying to make

 This decision by the Judge relates to the legal  issue of the McCanns  being prohibited from  representing  Madeleine's interests in court  ...   by virtue of the fact that they are not her legal guardians

That's what this is about,  isn't it  ?

For the life of me I can't understand why the McCanns' lawyers didn't warn them that was the case

How can you be a "legal guardian" of a dead child?
If the judge is accepting the UK courts are her guardians she must be accepting Madeleine may be alive. That undermines Amaral's claims, so why has he questioned the issue?

[Martina]

How can you be a "legal guardian" of a dead child?
If the judge is accepting the UK courts are her guardians she must be accepting Madeleine may be alive. That undermines Amaral's claims, so why has he questioned the issue?

It's not about what judge accepts or not. It's about a legal status of Madeleine, which is alive, as she went missing and not declared dead in absentia. But being legally alive is not the same as being physically alive, so it does not undermine Amaral's claims. At all.

[icabodcrane]

How can you be a "legal guardian" of a dead child?
If the judge is accepting the UK courts are her guardians she must be accepting Madeleine may be alive. That undermines Amaral's claims, so why has he questioned the issue?

The  McCanns applied to have their missing child made a ward of court a week after she disappeared

A week after she disappeared her parents  asked the court to be her guardian instead of them

It had nothing to do with whether she was still alive   ...   no-one  knew  whether she was or not.  It had to do with the court assuming all legal rights to represent the child's interests

That right has been recognised by the Portuguese Judge

[misty]

The  McCanns applied to have their missing child made a ward of court a week after she disappeared

A week after she disappeared her parents  asked the court to be her guardian instead of them

It had nothing to do with whether she was still alive   ...   no-one  knew  whether she was or not.  It had to do with the court assuming all legal rights to represent the child's interests

That right has been recognised by the Portuguese Judge

OK, I understand what you are saying.
So the application for this information at the last minute was Amaral's way of trying to reduce quantum of claim against him.

[icabodcrane]

I think that is a genuinely private matter for the McCanns and their family to deal with.

I doubt that we will discover any details  because basically it is none of our business, though I am sure some would disagree with me because they give the impression that they have the right to know every facet of the McCanns' lives.

If she remains a ward of court, I think it for the best, as it could give more weight if UK intervention is required in any future scenario pertaining to Madeleine being found in a third country.

It might not be any of our business,  but it is certainly  the business of a Portuguese Judge at the moment,   and we will,  by the looks of it,  discover the details whether it's our business or not
 
Timely bump John