Author Topic: Given the Appellate Courts decision, is the libel trial a foregone conclusion?  (Read 70259 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

ferryman

  • Guest
Although true or false doesn't seem to matter in Portugal in a Civil Action.

True or false must matter, for the simple reason that was true is not actionable.

I think there is an exception, referred to by Jean-Pierre way back, to s/he who is willing, no harm can come.

But that doctrine does no apply in the McCanns' action ...

Offline Eleanor


What worries me is that if Goncalo Amaral wins this action then anyone including him can say whatever they like about anyone, as a Precident will be set in Law.

ferryman

  • Guest
X,Y or Z may be able to prove damage, whether the allegations are true or not in a civil case, seemingly.

The difficulty seems to be in trying to prove and quantify damage.

It would be much more straightforward in some other types of civil cases, e.g, if someone's kid had thrown a football and broken a neighbour's glass greenhouse. The reparation would be to pay for the costs involved, i.e., restoring the situaton to what it was prior to the event in cause.

However, how do you prove and quantify non-financial damage?

I think, there, you are conflating negligence (a separate tort) with libel

Quantifying damage in the McCanns' action is as straightforward as calculating money made from the sale of the book and broadcast of the video, as well as from interviews propagating Amaral's lie.

ferryman

  • Guest
What worries me is that if Goncalo Amaral wins this action then anyone including him can say whatever they like about anyone, as a Precident will be set in Law.

Victory for Amaral would, effectively, be the death-knell of libel in Portugal, I agree ...

Offline Carana

I think, there, you are conflating negligence (a separate tort) with libel

Quantifying damage in the McCanns' action is as straightforward as calculating money made from the sale of the book and broadcast of the video, as well as from interviews propagating Amaral's lie.

That seems to be the basis of the amount claimed as damages, but I haven't found which articles in the civil code would support that.

Offline Carana

Victory for Amaral would, effectively, be the death-knell of libel in Portugal, I agree ...

No, not necessarily. Everyone and their brother seems to be accusing each other of criminal libel.

Even a journalist faced a criminal suit, apparently, for calling the president a clown. That's a criminal offence in PT.

Author investigated for calling Portuguese President ‘a clown'
Share on Facebook     
By Robert Myles / Editor-at-Large
May 25, 2013 in Politics
 +
Lisbon - Portugal's Attorney General has opened an investigation after celebrated author, Miguel Sousa Tavares, called Portugal’s head of state, President Silva, a clown in an interview. The author’s remarks could see him facing a three year jail term.

In the Anglo-Saxon world, the knockabout of politics comes with the territory. In the United States, it’s easy to imagine Barack Obama shrugging his shoulders were a heckler to use the clown epithet. Obama's been called a lot worse. In Australia, it’s become almost de rigueur for politicians to bandy insults when referring to their opponents. But in Portugal, thin skinned politicians in high office have the force of law to back them up.
In an interview with a journalist from the Portuguese business daily Jornal de Negocios, author Miguel Sousa Tavares had been asked about the possibility of a personality emerging in Portuguese politics similar to actor and politician Beppe Grillo in Italy, reports BBC News.

In response to the journalist’s question, author Miguel Sousa Tavares replied, "We already have a clown. His name (Anibal) Cavaco Silva."

Just a few hours after the interview was published the Attorney General’s office reportedly opened an investigation on whether Tavares’ comments constituted the offence of ‘insulting the honor’ of the Portuguese president.
Insulting the honor of the Head of State in Portugal constitutes an offence under Article 328 of the country’s Penal Code, says Portuguese daily Expresso. There, in law, those who insult or defame the President of the Republic can be punished with imprisonment of up to three years or a fine. And the statute goes on, magnifying the seriousness of Tavares alleged offence, ""If the libel or slander is made through words uttered publicly, publishing writing or drawing, or by any technical means of communication with the public, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment from six months to three years or with a fine and not less than 60 days imprisonment.""
The threat of landing in jail may have caused author Tavares to reflect. After his reported remarks appeared, he appears to have backtracked. Portuguese Lusa news agency says Tavares admitted it was “excessive” to call the President a clown.

And it didn’t end there, as if to prove that Portuguese politicians must be sensitive souls indeed, Portuguese Social Democrat politician Jorge Moreira da Silva expressed outrage at Tavares’ remarks. Released in a statement, da Silva said, "“The Social Democrat Party repudiates the insulting remarks of Miguel Sousa Tavares, and considers these exceeded the bounds of political combat. The fact that they were uttered by a person with additional responsibilities to the general public, resulting from his long and renowned career as a journalist, author, columnist and political commentator, makes these statements even more objectionable from the standpoint of the PSD.""
The role of the Portuguese President is largely ceremonial. In the case of President Aníbal Cavaco Silva, some of his previous utterances have raised a few eyebrows. Speaking of the numbers of Portuguese in public services, often reckoned to enjoy ‘jobs for life,’ he’s reputed to have said, “It's wait for them to die.” French daily Le Monde reports that President Silva was recently mocked by his compatriots for having said that "intervention of Our Lady of Fatima" has probably allowed Portugal, with financial assistance, to obtain a clean bill of health from its creditors.
At least author Miguel Sousa Tavares can count himself lucky on one score. Portugal abolished capital punishment for most civil crimes as far back as 1867. Otherwise these sensitive Portuguese politicians might have been crying, “Off with his head!”

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/350799#ixzz37AeIYNRw

Offline Carana

What worries me is that if Goncalo Amaral wins this action then anyone including him can say whatever they like about anyone, as a Precident will be set in Law.

That may depend on whether the litigation is civil or criminal.

Murat won his civil case, albeit on appeal, and for a pittance.

ferryman

  • Guest
That seems to be the basis of the amount claimed as damages, but I haven't found which articles in the civil code would support that.

I suspect there is little or no precedent in Portuguese law of a book sold in such vast numbers that perpetrates such libel.

The award to Robert Murat was relatively modest because no book was written about him.

Not for nothing is the judge wanting to know how much he made from the sale of his book ...

Offline Eleanor

That may depend on whether the litigation is civil or criminal.

Murat won his civil case, albeit on appeal, and for a pittance.

Agreed.  And the choice appears to depend on The Claimant.  Which is easiest to win?  Does anyone know?

Offline Carana

If they were true, I doubt that The McCanns would have brought this action in the first place.  Although true or false doesn't seem to matter in Portugal in a Civil Action.

It would have been so much easier to just disappear than continue to fight for their little girl.

I disagree with those who assert that it's obvious that the McCanns will win based on concepts of libel in UK law. I would wholeheartedy agree if this were a UK trial, but it isn't. It just doesn't seem to work that way in PT.

If the McCanns were to lose, I can anticipate the crowing from certain quarters that the McCanns lost the "libel" case and that therefore everything Amaral ever spouted must therefore be true, when, in reality, it just doesn't seem to be about "libel" (in a UK sense) in the first place.

Offline Carana

I suspect there is little or no precedent in Portuguese law of a book sold in such vast numbers that perpetrates such libel.

The award to Robert Murat was relatively modest because no book was written about him.

Not for nothing is the judge wanting to know how much he made from the sale of his book ...

Hmmm. I haven't checked to what extent he appears in the various books... However, the constant coverage in tabloid media and the money to be made at the time by the media makes his award for damages seem pathetic, IMO.

Offline Carana

Agreed.  And the choice appears to depend on The Claimant.  Which is easiest to win?  Does anyone know?

I'd need to double-check. From memory, it's quite easy to file a criminal claim and apparently it doesn't cost that much to file. The loser can face a prison sentence, but more likely a fine. However, from what I've read there are quite a few conditions which I can't remember offhand.

ferryman

  • Guest
Although true or false doesn't seem to matter in Portugal in a Civil Action.

Of course true or false matters.

In any country that has libel laws, an allegation proved true (however damaging to the reputation of the person against whom it is made) will not give rise to an action in libel.

In that sense, truth (or its absence) and libel are inextricably linked.

The only exception in the Napoleonic Code seems to be one Jean-Pierre referred to way back to s/he who is willing, no harm can come.

That doctrine does not apply in the McCanns' action.

Offline Carana

Specifically this refers to the re-organisation of the court structures which will be implemented in September. The current list of about 300 first-instance courts will be reduced to 23. Those that are no longer classed as full courts may still operate as subsidiary courts.

http://www.nc-advogados.com/2014/04/new-judicial-organization.html

There may be repercussions in other courts with regard to timing of cases.

The Portuguese legal system was identified by the EU as one of the major problems in stimulating growth in the Portuguese economy.

This article from Reuters very succinctly explains the background with businesses tied up in court cases for upwards of 20 years without seeing any results..

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/19/us-portugal-judiciary-reform-idUSBRE88I09V20120919

The EU demanded a programme of legal reform as part of its requirements for continued financial assistance. Those reforms included a restructuring of the court system (to be implemented in September), an improvement to the Civil Legal Code (which was implemented in September last year) and specific reforms to debt law in Portugal.

One point related to the changes in the Civil code is that the Judges hearing current cases (as in the McCann case) have until September of this year (as the theoretical deadline) to ensure that any procedural changes from the previous code to the current one are dealt with. This means that there may be procedural issues which the Judge in the McCann case has not yet dealt with. As an example there are a lot of changes to the way in which final hearings in court cases are dealt with and the judge may still have to consider these changes.

Further references:

http://ec.europa.eu/portugal/pdf/comissao/destaques/portugal_programme_assessment_15052014_en.pdf

http://www.amsa.pt/xms/files/cil_procedures_lax_21_ago_2013.pdf

If mods believe that this answer to a question on this thread is off-topic could it be moved to a separate thread rather than simply be deleted? Personally, I believe it is entirely on-topic.

That was interesting reading. Thanks, Gilet.

Offline Eleanor

I'd need to double-check. From memory, it's quite easy to file a criminal claim and apparently it doesn't cost that much to file. The loser can face a prison sentence, but more likely a fine. However, from what I've read there are quite a few conditions which I can't remember offhand.

Thanks.

This is a really good discussion, by the way