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

[Montclair]

The precise meaning is unclear.

Do The McCanns need to have had permission to represent Madeleine prior to bringing the action, or can they apply in retrospect?

Do they in fact already have this permission.

In any event, it is hardly a disaster.

The McCanns cannot apply retroactively for permission, it is a constant in law. The parents needed the authorisation from Justice Hogg before they filed their lawsuits on Madeleine's behalf.

[Montclair]

No one will "win", the case is suspended pending the results of Operation Grange.

No "secret sources" here, just a dab of common sense which tells me the ONLY reason a short non-criminal trial like this would be suspended, is the fact that the issue argued about (libel) is about to be resolved officially.

You obviously know nothing about Portuguese justice. Any trial, no matter how simple it seems can drag on forever.

[Silkywhiskers]

You obviously know nothing about Portuguese justice. Any trial, no matter how simple it seems can drag on forever.

That is ridiculous, this trial was expected to last no more than a week in January.

[Eleanor]

The McCanns cannot apply retroactively for permission, it is a constant in law. The parents needed the authorisation from Justice Hogg before they filed their lawsuits on Madeleine's behalf.

Do we know if they didn't actually have it?

[Silkywhiskers]

What ho!

The entire libel action is based on a false premise (I could have told you that) being that the McCanns have no legal right to any action on behalf of Madeleine.

Things really aren't going too well are they?

[Montclair]

Do we know if they didn't actually have it?

Well, we will see won't we.

[Silkywhiskers]

Well, we will see won't we.

Unfortunately when you are of an overly-litigious nature, you place yourself at risk of close examination that MAY NOT be part of your game plan.

[Benice]

Unfortunately when you are of an overly-litigious nature, you place yourself at risk of close examination that MAY NOT be part of your game plan.

There would have been no need for them to be litigous at all if they had not been so disgracefully libelled in the first place.

[Silkywhiskers]

There would have been no need for them to be litigous at all if they had not been so disgracefully libelled in the first place.

What libel?

Who libelled them?

[carlymichelle]

What libel?

Who libelled them?

 no one   did GA     was/is a police officer their job isnt to be  nice!!!

[misty]

no one   did GA     was/is a police officer their job isnt to be  nice!!!

He wasn't acting in his capacity as a police officer when he libelled the McCanns. That's why he had to resign his position - or had you overlooked that fact?

[John]

Well, take a look at this.

http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html



Interesting to say the least. >@@(*&)

'Judge rules that Kate and Gerry McCann do not possess the authority to sue Gonçalo Amaral in their daughter’s name.


The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”.

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates. '

It wasn't too many weeks ago that certain members were disputing that these proceedings were even taking place.  Now would be a good time to apologise for their erroneous assertions.

Libel or even slander has not been proven in the McCann V Gonçalo & Others case so please remember this in all posts. TY

[gilet]

Personally, I do not think this ruling by the Judge and request for documentation from the McCanns regarding prior approval from the High Court is good news for the parents of Madeleine. It suggests that the claims made on behalf of their daughter could possibly be ruled invalid.

But, I think it is a clear sign that Amaral believes he is likely to lose the actual argument regarding the case.

This is a very late move on his part, after four or more years of legal argument, to limit the potential damage he may be suhjected to. Were he to believe that he was actually winning the substantive legal arguments then he would have no need to attempt this damage limitation.

Also I wonder just what the Judge will think of this late tactic. Does it mean that Amaral was not even aware that Madeleine McCann had been made a ward of court? Was his knowledge of the case and the surrounding events so poor? Or was this tactic held in reserve? Was it that famous "ace up his sleeve" that we kept hearing about? If so, and if the Judge learns that he knew of this potential lack of validity of the case earlier and did nothing about it till so late in the day that would not bode well for him at all.

And finally, no matter how this pans out regarding the validity of the judicial claims made by the parents on the part of their daughter it does not affect the other four claims against the former detective. The case will still have to be judged on the basis of the damage potentially caused to the four individuals concerned by his thesis which suggested the McCanns behaved illegally which he published after the PT authorities had produced the case report which stated that there was no evidence of any crime by them.

[Eleanor]

I have seen no evidence to suggest that The McCanns lost the right to act for their daughter when she was a made a Ward of Court. Indeed, they requested it.  It was only done to ensure that Madeleine would be returned immediately to British jurisdiction should some party try to prevent this.  And there has never been any doubt that Madeleine would be returned to them when she is found.

This has just been a delaying tactic as far as I can see.

[Eleanor]

Post by Jean Pierre.


Re: Madeleine McCann made a 'Ward of Court' by English Judge.
« Reply #16 on: October 26, 2013, 06:34:00 PM »
Quote
Quote from: comanche on October 26, 2013, 06:29:41 PM
they will be involved 

I think you are correct.  (Apart from being her parents), they are also her legal guardians under the terms of the wardship, and as such it would be tricky for the Portuguese authorities to argue against their being assistentes on those grounds.