Sky Documentary - Searching For Madeleine

[Brietta]

The fact that no trace of her has been found is evidence that she no longer lives.

Remember the standard 7 year ruling in courts.

The fact that she and her siblings were left by themselves, means they were not being taken care of. Left in a situation where they were exposed to danger. A breach of their human rights.

No request has been made to any court to have Madeleine presumed dead.

The Portuguese Attorney General rubbishes your contention of exposure to danger. 

[stephen25000]

No request has been made to any court to have Madeleine presumed dead.

The Portuguese Attorney General rubbishes your contention of exposure to danger.

Give that time.

Madeleine disappeared without trace.

The former Portuguese Minister,  Rui Periera who stated the McCann's should have been made arguidos and charged with abandonment. Crystal clear on that. He said it was a mistake not to charge them.

[Brietta]

Give that time.

Madeleine disappeared without trace.

The former Portuguese Minister,  Rui Periera who stated the McCann's should have been made arguidos and charged with abandonment. Crystal clear on that. He said it was a mistake not to charge them.

I'm rather hoping that Madeleine is recovered alive and well ... now I suggest we both get back on topic because we are both going to end up whooshed on edit anyway.

[Mr Gray]

I do;
The Supreme Court of The Republic of Portugal is the highest court in that state, there being no mechanisms for overturning it's rulings.
It cannot be overruled by the ECJ as that it is outside the scope of the ECJ which rules on European Union matters not matters of national law.
It cannot be overruled by the ECHR as that is outside the remit of the ECHR.
If a plaintiff makes a complaint against a member state of The Council of Europe it may, if admissible, eventually be heard by the ECHR who may fine the member state and ask them to change their laws if deemed desirable by the ECHR. The fine may be paid to plaintiff as compensation. Just as guide to quantum Steel and Morris were only awarded £50k by the ECHR against the UK in the McLibel Trial.
Then of course the state may just ignore the ruling as over 75% of states do.
So as it sits at present:
The ruling of the SC remains and will so in perpetuity.
The Drs McCann will have to pay the costs awarded by the courts plus their own legal costs unless someother arrangement satisfactory to all parties be agreed.
Appealing to the ECHR is a long winded process whereby one may, apparently, finish up with an unenforceable piece of paper.

You have missed out what is perhaps the most important point
The ECHR can rule that the member state applied the law incorrectly
This useless piece of paper would show that the McCanns had been the victims of a miscarriage of justice by Portugal and that amaral had indeed defamed them. It could show just how much the SC got the law wrong

[Robittybob1]

You have missed out what is perhaps the most important point
The ECHR can rule that the member state applied the law incorrectly
This useless piece of paper would show that the McCanns had been the victims of a miscarriage of justice by Portugal and that amaral had indeed defamed them. It could show just how much the SC got the law wrong

It could be that a ruling in favour of the McCanns will affect the law in Portugal going forward rather than retrospectively.  They may get some compensation from Portugal but the verdict will stand as it is.

[Mr Gray]

It could be that a ruling in favour of the McCanns will affect the law in Portugal going forward rather than retrospectively.  They may get some compensation from Portugal but the verdict will stand as it is.

The verdict will stand
The McCanns would get some compensation but perhaps not much
What they would get is confirmation that they have been very badly treated by Portugal
Is it worth it
That's up to the McCanns and it seems they think it is

[Mr Gray]

The verdict will stand
The McCanns would get some compensation but perhaps not much
What they would get is confirmation that they have been very badly treated by Portugal
Is it worth it
That's up to the McCanns and it seems they think it is

And how would that affect any potential claim by amaral
Could the Portuguese courts award compensation to amaral if it had been shown that their judgement was wrong
If amaral did try to claim compensation could the McCanns argue that any claim should be delayed until the judgement had been reviewed by the ECHR

[G-Unit]

And how would that affect any potential claim by amaral
Could the Portuguese courts award compensation to amaral if it had been shown that their judgement was wrong
If amaral did try to claim compensation could the McCanns argue that any claim should be delayed until the judgement had been reviewed by the ECHR

It won't affect anything payable in connection with the recent case. Court costs etc will have to be paid. Possibly interest on Amaral's money, possibly compensation for the freezing injunction. If the McCanns go to the ECHR their case is against Portugal, not Amaral.

[Mr Gray]

It won't affect anything payable in connection with the recent case. Court costs etc will have to be paid. Possibly interest on Amaral's money, possibly compensation for the freezing injunction. If the McCanns go to the ECHR their case is against Portugal, not Amaral.

Of course it won't affect the court costs but read my post again and you wil see what I am questioning re any compensation claim

[G-Unit]

Of course it won't affect the court costs but read my post again and you wil see what I am questioning re any compensation claim

I don't know what that means, but any new claims in the Portuguese Courts are separate matters.

[Mr Gray]

I don't know what that means, but any new claims in the Portuguese Courts are separate matters.

We are getting  away from the original  point  which is did amaral defame the McCann s
Portugal says no but theECHR has the final say

[Robittybob1]

We are getting  away from the original  point  which is did amaral defame the McCann s
Portugal says no but theECHR has the final say

If they file a claim.  Have they done it yet?

[Alice Purjorick]

You have missed out what is perhaps the most important point
The ECHR can rule that the member state applied the law incorrectly
This useless piece of paper would show that the McCanns had been the victims of a miscarriage of justice by Portugal and that amaral had indeed defamed them. It could show just how much the SC got the law wrong

Which law would that be + cite please.

[Robittybob1]

Which law would that be + cite please.

It was a subsection of the Code of Civil Conduct.

[faithlilly]

How much is The Retainer?  And how often do The McCanns have to pay it?

I ask again. If the fund run out of money who would pay the retainer for Carter Ruck ?