Libel trial day 14 - Statement of facts proved/not proved issued to lawyers.

[John]

Could they not be pursued by Amaral/the Portuguese lawyers under a European Payment Order, in the unlikely event of them losing the case?

Only for claims up to €2000 otherwise it is merely a case of raising an action in a local English Court.

[Mr Gray]

Which would be in PT.

the mccanns could raise a claim inn the uk for damages against amaral...in the unlikely event that a portuguese court awarded costs against them...this cross country law is extremely complex

[slartibartfast]

the mccanns could raise a claim inn the uk for damages against amaral...in the unlikely event that a portuguese court awarded costs against them...this cross country law is extremely complex

Wishful thinking, try again.

[John]

the mccanns could raise a claim inn the uk for damages against amaral...in the unlikely event that a portuguese court awarded costs against them...this cross country law is extremely complex

They could indeed but an English Court might not entertain it since it has already been adjudicated on in another Court.  In any event, this is all wildly speculative since I see no reason why the Madeleine Fund wouldn't pay any indebtedness incurred in Portugal.

[Mr Gray]

They could indeed but an English Court might not entertain it since it has already been adjudicated on in another Court.

the case has not been judged in the uk...by uk standards amaral is guilty of libel...so the interesting question is...could the mccanns sue for libel in the uk...there are at present more questions than answers

[Lyall]

the case has not been judged in the uk...by uk standards amaral is guilty of libel...so the interesting question is...could the mccanns sue for libel in the uk...there are at present more questions than answers

If they could have sued him in London they would have.

[Alfred R Jones]

the case has not been judged in the uk...by uk standards amaral is guilty of libel...so the interesting question is...could the mccanns sue for libel in the uk...there are at present more questions than answers

I doubt it, but then if Gonc wants to counter-sue he would have to do so in the UK presumably - I wonder if he's got the stamina (and the funds) for another court case in a foreign country, as well as fighting any appeal that might take place in his own with regard the current trial....

[Carana]

AFAIK, punitive damages don't exist in PT, unless anyone has information to the contrary.

[Alfred R Jones]

AFAIK, punitive damages don't exist in PT, unless anyone has information to the contrary.

Then why have the McCanns been seeking £1m from Amaral in a PT court?  Have they been wrongly advised?

[Alice Purjorick]

Then why have the McCanns been seeking £1m from Amaral in a PT court?  Have they been wrongly advised?

Compensatory damages?

[Carana]

Then why have the McCanns been seeking £1m from Amaral in a PT court?  Have they been wrongly advised?

No idea.

[John]

Two recent articles by Correio da Manhã on last Wednesdays proceedings in Lisbon.






Maddie: Court gives as proven damage caused by Gonçalo Amaral

By Lusa
21 January 2015

Magistrate considers that the book reproduces excerpts appearing in the process.

This Wednesday the Court heard evidence that the book by former Inspector of Judicial Police (PJ) Gonçalo Amaral, entitled 'Maddie: The Truth of the Lie', caused damage to the parents of Madeleine McCann, the British child who went missing in the Algarve in 2007. 

In the Order, the magistrate also considered that the book reproduces excerpts appearing in the process in which Kate and Gerry McCann were made arguidos, in September 2007, archived in July of the following year, without which the British couple wouldn't have been accused.

Madeleine McCann disappeared when she was four-years-old in the tourist village of Aldeia da Luz, near Portimao, where the family was on vacation.  Kate and Gerry McCann have always maintained the position that Maddie was abducted.  The case was recently reopened by prosecutors.

www.cmjornal.xl.pt/nacional/portugal/detalhe/maddie_tribunal_da_como_provado_danos_causados_por_goncalo_amaral_a_kate_e_gerry_mccann.html

[John]

McCann: "Couple destroyed before the book"

By Magali Pinto
22 January 2015

Judge Emilia Melo e Castro, who decides on the civil proceedings between the parents of Maddie and Gonçalo Amaral, former PJ detective, concluded that, "it has not been proved that Kate and Gerry McCann have been destroyed from a moral, social and ethical point of view "- despite considering that due to the publication of the book 'Maddie, the truth of the lie, Amaral, the couple" felt anger, despair, anxiety, worry, and suffered insomnia and lack of appetite."

These are some of the facts considered proven in the lawsuit filed by the parents of Madeleine - the girl who disappeared May 2007 from Praia da Luz in the Algarve, when she was three - they are seeking compensation of EUR 1.2 million. 

The McCanns considered the book, which takes the view that parents are directly linked to the disappearance of the child, "shocking and an affront to the family." 

The magistrate has not set a date for determining this civil action.

www.cmjornal.xl.pt/nacional/portugal/detalhe/2015_01_21_casal_destruido_antes_de_livro.html

[Carana]

Compensatory damages?

Possibly.

Nothing seems to be clear in PT law.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1QEjSxsmDJQC&pg=PA109&lpg=PA109&dq=Portugal+%22punitive+damages%22&source=bl&ots=oDdFj1Tdqk&sig=VkUqA2o_NTonMR_XwrxO3NN7h2M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=F3_FVKbOIsTZO9SOgLAD&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Portugal%20%22punitive%20damages%22&f=false


http://www.estig.ipbeja.pt/~ac_direito/European_Principles_Tort_Law_Portugal.pdf


http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/actionsdamages/national_reports/portugal_en.pdf

I'm not sure if this is within one of the above or not as I'm not sure of the link. This may be out of date and it referred to patent disputes, although the principles seem similar:



The Portuguese Civil Code stipulates that indemnities are the means by which a party who has suffered damage is restored to the situation he would have been in had the illegal action never occurred. Financial remedies are calculated by taking into consideration direct economic losses, lost income and moral damages. Punitive or exemplary damages are not accepted in Portugal  and therefore only that loss which can actually be proved to have been suffered or is considered to be lost revenue will be taken into consideration. This is the first problem for most patent infringement cases, given that plaintiffs have few (if any) viable ways of proving that the infringer's actions actually affected sales or were detrimental to the plaintiff's image. Not only is there difficulty in proving damages and lost profits but, more crucially, it is often impossible to show the causal link between the infringer's activities and the losses claimed. Most Portuguese judges have not made matters easier, as they often adopt a strict view in terms of proof and reasonable claims. It is also commonplace to find that the plaintiff does not have adequate records ofd his sales and profits, or even a clear idea of the economic impact of the infringement on his business, and this obviously makes it extremely difficult [to] argue persuasively in court.

[Carana]

And, on the topic of libel and arguidos, has any news outlet besides Amaral's latest interview confirmed that Murat is an arguido again? Or was that another mistake on his part?