Luz declares the Portuguese libel trial is not a libel trial ?

[stephen25000]

Apart from an unsucessful attempt to reach an out of court settlement, I cannot recall any delays occasioned by the McCanns.  But no doubt you will be able to list them. 

And Madeleines status is "missing".  And that will remain the case until she is found dead or alive.  The "seven year in absentia" rule is irrelevant.  But entirely predicatable that it should be introduced as a delaying tactic.

It is evident to anyone with even half a brain that Amaral is not exactly champing at the bit to conclude this case.  If he is so confident of winning, then it begs the question - "why?"

No, a brief reminder.

it is the mccanns who have to prove their case, not the other way around, and as Amaral found itself, it is very difficult to prove libel in Portugal.

[Mr Gray]

No, a brief reminder.

it is the mccanns who have to prove their case, not the other way around, and as Amaral found itself, it is very difficult to prove libel in Portugal.

An oft quoted phrase.....but do you know WHAT the mccanns have to prove

[Victoria]

There have been delays on both sides.

The latest is apparently due to Madeleine's status after 7 years.

There is no change to her status after seven years, that's another myth.

[Brietta]

Or you could turn it on its head and ask "If the case of Dr Amaral's and his co defendants is so weak why did they not settle out court between 2009 and Sept 2013"?
The truth is we don't know the answers we may pontificate and speculate til the cows come home and we will still not know.
There have been longer libel trials.

Can you provide a cite for any?

[Carana]

McDonalds v Steel and Morris went on for 10 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLibel_case

David Hunt v Sunday Times went on for about three years.

El Naschie v Nature Publishing Group went on for about 4 years.

The case involving Josh Cairns was protracted.

Lord Justice May observed 10 years ago in GKR Karate UK Ltd v Yorkshire Post Newspapers Ltd (No. 1) 2 All ER 951 :

“Libel cases generally have historically been notoriously long drawn out and expensive and are especially amenable to the culture of the new procedure code.  They need novel and imaginative case management to achieve what has hitherto often not been achieved”.

The Sunday Times v Lance Armstrong is always worthy of a read to see why English Libel laws were liked.

Could you provide examples in PT civil libel cases?

ETA: There is obviously the Murat case, in which he won on appeal...

[Mr Gray]

So you answered your own question.

so how long did the murat case take

[Mr Gray]

Does anyone have a link to all 36 pages of the writ?
I know the value of the damages claimed for each plaintiff on the writ.
430 grand for Madeleine. 215 each for G&K and 86 each for the twins. That might be why the interest in the WoC lark. Presumably if Dr Amaral loses and the court grants the full value of damages, Justice Hogg will have the 430 grand put in a managed trust until Madeleine attains her majority?

and thats exactly why amaral is confirming the woc status..imo...makes absolute sense

[Carana]

what  do the mccanns have to prove...lots of idiots on here who think they undersatnd portuguese law

TBH, I don't.

However, no one has yet explained to me whether I may be mistaken in thinking that Murat initially lost his suit against CdaM despite their frankly horrific allegations.

He does seem to have won on appeal, though.

[Mr Gray]

amaral may be questioning the legality of the claim on behalf of maddie....if he can strike that claim out he can keep half of his money

[Mr Gray]

TBH, I don't.

However, no one has yet explained to me whether I may be mistaken in thinking that Murat initially lost his suit against CdaM despite their frankly horrific allegations.

He does seem to have won on appeal, though.

you only have to look at the witness statements in the trial to see who is trying to prove what

[Carana]

Surely it is only defamation if untrue. That has yet to be determined.

Murat couldn't prove that the horrific allegations against him were untrue... how could he? It would seem that he eventually won on appeal, though...

[jassi]

Murat couldn't prove that the horrific allegations against him were untrue... how could he? It would seem that he eventually won on appeal, though...

Indeed, because it was the court that decided what was true.

[Mr Gray]

Indeed, because it was the court that decided what was true.

it was that courts opinion that the statement was untrue...another judge could have a different opinion...in most sensible peoples opinion the mccanns have been defamed...whatever one judge says

[jassi]

This was printed in the Telegraph
Mr McCann, a heart specialist and Mrs McCann, a former GP, are now seeking damages for themselves and their twins, Sean and Amelie plus further damages for the harm caused to the search for Madeleine, who would now be ten years old.

In a 36-page writ, first lodged in June 2009, they describe Mr Amaral as a self obsessed, manipulative money-grabber and accuse him of libel and breaching their human rights.

Any one have the link to the full writ?

Could that be a case of the pot calling the kettle black ?

[John]

The issue at stake in this libel trial is quite simple actually.  Dr Amaral has made certain claims in his book 'The Truth of the Lie'  which the McCanns claim libels them and damaged the search for Madeleine. In order to succeed their lawyer has to set out how the libel came about and evidence it.

Until it is known what befell Madeleine I cannot see how either side can possibly succeed.