Author Topic: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?  (Read 1741 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online Davel

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #135 on: July 12, 2018, 09:51:10 PM »
Davel.

Thought I'd give you your cite (well sortof).

You were incorrect. It was a Conditional Fee Arrangment otherwise known as No Win No Fee. Not Pro Bono. It is on CR's own website.


https://www.carter-ruck.com/images/uploads/documents/McCann-Press_Release-03102014.PDF

And Gerry himself

I should mention that Carter-Ruck made clear that they would be willing to act for us in our libel dispute on the basis of a Conditional Fee Agreement, albeit that in the end

 this was not necessary as Express Newspapers and Associated Newspapers did not contest our complaints. However, had it not been for the availability of a CFA, it would have been very difficult - if not impossible - for Kate and I to have brought the complaint as we do not have the resources to take on large media organisations in this way.


Sort of a bogof deal. Two cites for the price of one.
As I have already said it doesn't matter... The mccanns could not have got court...it was in the lawyers hands
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Online Sunny

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #136 on: July 12, 2018, 09:54:41 PM »
As I have already said it doesn't matter... The mccanns could not have got court...it was in the lawyers hands

Davel do you ever admit you are wrong? 

The McCanns could have gone to court. They were instructing the solicitors not the other way around. Admittedly if the solicitors thought there was little chance of winning and it was a CRA then they could refuse to go ahead but then they would be unlikely to have taken the case in the first place.

 
Can I have a cite for "the mccanns could not have gone to court" please.

Online Davel

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #137 on: July 12, 2018, 10:02:22 PM »
Davel do you ever admit you are wrong? 

The McCanns could have gone to court. They were instructing the solicitors not the other way around. Admittedly if the solicitors thought there was little chance of winning and it was a CRA then they could refuse to go ahead but then they would be unlikely to have taken the case in the first place.

 
Can I have a cite for "the mccanns could not have gone to court" please.

I've already explained it.. Look back at the posts...
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Online Sunny

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #138 on: July 12, 2018, 10:05:41 PM »
I've already explained it.. Look back at the posts...

OK I'd better write to Wikipedia and tell them despite all the evidence to the contrary, that Pro Bono = Conditional Fee Arrangement (no win no fee) just because Davel says it is.

By the way I gave you my cites (many of them) on a pro bono basis whereas you have given me not one cite of any description.

Online Davel

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #139 on: July 12, 2018, 10:09:49 PM »
OK I'd better write to Wikipedia and tell them despite all the evidence to the contrary, that Pro Bono = Conditional Fee Arrangement (no win no fee) just because Davel says it is.

By the way I gave you my cites (many of them) on a pro bono basis whereas you have given me not one cite of any description.

Alice may well remember I have, already corrected Wikipedia in relation to an issue on this forum.. Once the papers had agreed to settle in reality the mccanns could not have taken them to court for reasons I have already explainef
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Online Sunny

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #140 on: July 12, 2018, 10:12:15 PM »
Alice may well remember I have, already corrected Wikipedia in relation to an issue on this forum.. Once the papers had agreed to settle in reality the mccanns could not have taken them to court for reasons I have already explainef

Could you show me where the McCanns used CR on a pro bono basis though?  I gather also there were several papers that were sued by the couple were there reasons for all of them as to why the pair couldn't take them to court too?

Please, can you give me a cite where the McCanns used CR on a pro bono basis.  I gather cites are required when statements are made. I have shown you mine, so show me yours.

Online Davel

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #141 on: July 12, 2018, 10:16:19 PM »
Could you show me where the McCanns used CR on a pro bono basis though?  I gather also there were several papers that were sued by the couple were there reasons for all of them as to why the pair couldn't take them to court too?

Please, can you give me a cite where the McCanns used CR on a pro bono basis.  I gather cites are required when statements are made. I have shown you mine, so show me yours.
Alice quoted opinion as fact and gave no cite... So let's start there first... CR acted on a no win no fee basis... That's pro bono
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Online Sunny

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #142 on: July 12, 2018, 10:21:24 PM »
Alice quoted opinion as fact and gave no cite... So let's start there first... CR acted on a no win no fee basis... That's pro bono

No it isn't Davel. = no win  there is no fee. You win there is a fee but it will be mitigated by the losing party paying at least some if not all of the costs.

Pro bono = no fee fullstop except occasionally lawyers working pro bono will accept some of the legal fees to be paid but they will go to a charity for paying expenses for lawyers doing pro bono work. I don't think CR are a charity do you?

Cite that pro bono = CFA /NWNF then please Davel.  You haven't stated that the McCanns using CR on pro bono was an "opinion" you have stated it several times as though it was a fact. There fore cite please.

Online Sunny

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #143 on: July 12, 2018, 10:27:21 PM »
so here is the post...the mccanns may well have wished to put it before a judge...we do not know...alice is posting opinion as fact...

What has Alice got to do with our conversation. Davel, you were posting opinion (incorrect as it turns out) as fact.

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #144 on: July 12, 2018, 10:29:12 PM »
Alice quoted opinion as fact and gave no cite... So let's start there first... CR acted on a no win no fee basis... That's pro bono

You have lost this one, to prevent further disruption please desist.
Helping Elite sufferers of NPD for over 2 years...

Online Davel

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #145 on: July 12, 2018, 10:32:01 PM »
You have lost this one, to prevent further disruption please desist.

in your opinion..tell me ...if the mccanns had lost the action...how much would they have to pay....if it is zero as I suspect...then the action was pro bono...and not CFA as there was no conditional fee
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Online Sunny

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #146 on: July 12, 2018, 10:35:19 PM »
You have lost this one, to prevent further disruption please desist.

I agree. I have had enough of it anyway.

Thought I'd add thanks slartibartfast I was losing the will to live there. Enough is enough.

Online Davel

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #147 on: July 12, 2018, 10:35:47 PM »
Maybe so but nothing to do with the subject matter of this thread.
Lest ye forget; a settlement out of court does not reflect guilt of either party.
Libel in the UK press was never tested, the plaintiffs and defendants preferring to enter into a different sort of contract as it were. What would be interesting to know is whether the settlement were reached pre or post actual court proceedings.
I doubt we know that for sure, carefully choreographed and posed for photos on the steps of the court in The Strand notwithstanding.

Notes to editors
The defamatory article alleged that Mr and Mrs McCann had kept secret from
the investigating authorities crucial evidence (primarily consisting of "e-fits"
obtained by private investigators) relating to their daughter's abduction.
2. The Sunday Times' allegations were completely false.
3. As the newspaper now accepts,
there is no question of the McCanns having
sought to suppress any evidence; indeed all of the material collated by the
private investigators had been provided to the relevant Portuguese and
Leicestershire police four years earlier. The private investigators' report
(including the e-fits) was also provided to the Metropolitan Police in 2011 shortly
after it commenced its review into Madeleine's disappearance.
2
McCann/Sunday Times - Press Release - 3.10.2014
1652465_1
4. The Sunday Times refused to apologise or to make a prompt and prominent
correction. The correction they printed 6 weeks later was on an inside page and
was inadequate.
5. The McCanns were forced to make a legal claim in the High Court because of
the Sunday Times' refusal to accept responsibility.
6. Only after the newspaper was sued did the it accept liability and offer to settle
the case.

UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Online Davel

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #148 on: July 12, 2018, 10:42:40 PM »
So not only did the ST settle they, accepted all their claims were false... So if they admitted they were wrong... How could they go to court... They admitted libel
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 10:46:14 PM by Davel »
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Were the media wrong to settle defamation actions out of court?
« Reply #149 on: July 12, 2018, 10:48:31 PM »
Notes to editors
The defamatory article alleged that Mr and Mrs McCann had kept secret from
the investigating authorities crucial evidence (primarily consisting of "e-fits"
obtained by private investigators) relating to their daughter's abduction.
2. The Sunday Times' allegations were completely false.
3. As the newspaper now accepts,
there is no question of the McCanns having
sought to suppress any evidence; indeed all of the material collated by the
private investigators had been provided to the relevant Portuguese and
Leicestershire police four years earlier. The private investigators' report
(including the e-fits) was also provided to the Metropolitan Police in 2011 shortly
after it commenced its review into Madeleine's disappearance.
2
McCann/Sunday Times - Press Release - 3.10.2014
1652465_1
4. The Sunday Times refused to apologise or to make a prompt and prominent
correction. The correction they printed 6 weeks later was on an inside page and
was inadequate.
5. The McCanns were forced to make a legal claim in the High Court because of
the Sunday Times' refusal to accept responsibility.
6. Only after the newspaper was sued did the it accept liability and offer to settle
the case.

So?
It's okay to reinvent the wheel, but only when you understand how the current wheel works.