MADELEINE THE MILLION DOLLAR BABY? .... LITIGATION AND THE McCANNS - whose money are they actually spending? Must run into millions seeing as how they have lost or abandoned more legal actions than they have won.
(sources jillhavern.forumotion.net, themccannfiles.com, maddiemccannmilliondollarbaby.blogspot.com)
========================================
McCanns v Tal & Qual
Why? They said they were libelled.
When? 31 August 2007.
Result? McCanns had to abandon their legal action because the newspaper went out of business through falling sales.
Lawyer used: Carlos Pinto de Abreu.
Carlos Pinto de Abreu quoted as saying: “The press has engaged in a horrific exercise in scandal-mongering, replete with rumours and lurid commentaries...to sell more TV time and newspaper space to advertisers”. Tal * Qual stood by their story; the journalist who wrote the article, Catarina Vaz Guerreiro, said: “I can't reveal my source, but I have complete trust in them. I strongly believe that the person that gave us this information is telling the truth”.
============================================
McCanns v 24Horas (Portuguese media)
Why? Various ‘smears’ against the McCanns including claims that
Dr Gerald McCann was not Madeleine’s father.
When? October 2007
Result? Action threatened but not begun.
12 October 2007, Daily Mail: “Kate and Gerry McCann are planning to sue a Portuguese newspaper in the British libel courts, the Evening Standard can reveal. The McCanns are considering the action against Lisbon-based 24 Horas after becoming increasingly angered by a series of smears. The McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell said today: ‘24 Horas is running an absolutely despicable campaign and Kate and Gerry are not afraid to take legal action’.They can bring the action here because 24 Horas has a website available for download in the UK. The damages could be so large, it has been suggested, it could put the newspaper out of business”.
Lawyer used: Carlos Pinto de Abreu.
================================
McCanns v Media (Express Newspapers, other TV and media outlets)
Why? Claims they were libelled by suggestions they were somehow involved in Madeleine’s disappearance
When? Claim made early 2008?
Result? £550,000 gained, settled out of court, front-page apologies printed Wednesday 19 March 2008 and Sunday 23 March
Lawyer used: Carter Ruck
The Guardian’s Roy Greenslade said: “It is unprecedented for four major newspapers to offer front-page apologies, but it is more than warranted given that the papers had committed a substantial libel that ‘shamed the entire British press’.”
==========================================
McCanns v Paulo Reis, Portuguese journalist
Why? Claims they were libelled in a series of articles by Reis in 2007 & 2008
When? Claim made summer 2008?
Result? Paulo Reis mentioned his libel letter from the McCanns in an article dated Ocober 2008; he had already taken a break from writing about Madeleine McCann in order to concentrate on writing about other stories. It is not known if he withdrew any of his articles about Madeleine; probably not.
Lawyers used: Carter Ruck.
Quote from Paulo Reis "I received a letter from Carter-Ruck, threatening to take me to court, if I don't stop immediately writing about the case - something I have no intention to do"
================================================
McCanns v Goncalo Amaral and Portuguese TV Station TVI
Why? Claims they were libelled by suggestions they were somehow involved in Madeleine’s disappearance
When? Libel action was threatened in July 2008 when Mr Amaral published his book but it didn’t get under way until the McCanns served a writ in June or July 2009
Result? Complex! :
· Sep 2009 Book banned, TV1 documentary banned, books impounded
· Dec 2009/Jan/Feb 2010 Hearing of Amaral’s appeal against the book ban; appeal failed
· Oct 2010 Portuguese Appeal Court upholds Amaral’s appeal; book unbanned
. McCanns put forward appeal to the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ)
. Mar 2011 Portuguese Supreme Court hears appeal by McCanns against book 'unbanning’ -appeal fails, Amaral’s book can be sold.
McCanns say they will appeal still further.
Lawyer used: Isobel Duarte.
======================================
McCanns v T Bennett & D Butler
Why? Claims they were libelled in a book, a leaflet and on a website by suggestions they were somehow involved in Madeleine’s disappearance
When? 27 August 2009
Result? Bennett and Butler agreed not to distribute ’60 Reasons’ book and ’10
Reasons’ leaflet and not to libel the McCanns; Bennett required to pay £400 Court costs.
Lawyer used: Carter Ruck.
====================================
McCanns v Pamalam (owner of ‘gerrymccannsblogs’ website, and her hosters)
When? 2009?
Why? Claims that Dr Gerald McCann’s blogs were copyright and that there was libellous content on the blog.
Result: Unsuccessful. Pamalam retained the entries complained of as her hosters required the McCanns’ lawyers to obtain a Court Order. The lawyers did not apply for one.
Lawyer used: Carter Ruck.
===============================================
McCanns v Madeleine Foundation
Why? Claims the McCanns were libelled by an article by Barbara Nottage in which she said the abduction could not have happened in the claimed time slot of 3-4 minutes
When? January 2010.
Result: Half of the article removed.
Lawyer used: Carter Ruck.
===========================================
McCanns v Madeleine Foundation
Why? Claims that a leaflet about Goncalo Amaral was libellous
When? February 2010.
Result: Distribution of the leaflet suspended for four months.
Lawyer used: Carter Ruck.
===========================================
McCanns & Jon Corner v McCann Exposure blog & Wordpress
Why? Claims the blog breached copyright and was libellous
When? 2 June 2011
Result: Copyright photos removed and some changes made to the blog’s content.
Lawyer used: Carter Ruck.
=============================================
McCanns v Paulo Sargento, Hernâni Carvalho and Manuel Luis Goucha and TVI
Why? Claims they libelled the McCanns in a TV discussion
When? 15 June 2011
Result: ?
Lawyer used: Isobel Duarte.
Quote from article: “Three personalities of the small screen in Portugal began to be interviewed yesterday, Wednesday, after they were declared ‘arguidos’ - suspects, in a complaint of criminal libel. The complaint cites the contribution of the three ‘arguidos’ during the broadcast of a talk-show where details of the Portuguese police investigation of Madeleine McCann were discussed”.
==========================================
McCanns v Pat Brown, Criminal Profiler in the U.S.A.
Why? Claims her e-book, 'Profiling the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann', libelled them
When? mid-July 2011
Result: Amazon stopped listing her book, claiming that the McCanns have alleged that her book is defamatory and that, as they haven't the resources to say whether a book is libellous or not, they're removing it from sale. Pat Brown is suing for 'tortuous interference with business' because the McCanns caused her book to be withdrawn from sale on Amazon.
Lawyer used: Carter Ruck.
===============================================
McCanns v Tony Bennett
Why? They claim that Tony Bennett has breached his undertaking not to accuse the McCanns of any involvement in the disappearance of their daughter and is therefore guilty of contempt of court. They have said they will shortly issue contempt proceedings. They also demanded the remove of around 50 articles and postings by him.
When? Letter written 12 August 2011.
Result: Contempt proceedings served on Tony Bennett when a large cardboard box was delivered to him by limousine on 1 December 2011. . The articles and postings to which the McCanns objected have been removed.
Lawyer used: Isabel Hudson at Carter-Ruck.
=================================
McCanns v. Goncalo Amaral (and others), at Civil Court of Lisbon
Why? McCanns take out action claiming damages of 1.2 million for defamation and distress to themselves and their three children caused by his book.
When? February 2012 but postponed until September. But start delayed again due to the ill health and hospital admission of Goncalo Amaral.
. January 2013 commencement of proceedings postponed again due to McCanns seeking extra-judicial (out of court) settlement. Settlement not reached.
. September 2013 court action commences
. January 2015 - in her summing up the Judge appears to state that the majority of the claims made by the McCanns are largely unproven.
. April 2015 - but in a surprising Ruling the Judge rules that Amaral must pay 500,000 Euros in damages to McCanns, and she banns further sales of his book The Truth of the Lie .
. April 2016 - Goncalo Amaral appeals to the Appellate Court against the Civil Court judgement and wins. His book ban is lifted.
. May 2016 - McCanns to appeal to Supreme Court against the Appellate Court Judgement in Amaral's favour.
. February 2017 Amaral wins his Supreme Court case: "And let it NOT be said, also, that the appellants were cleared by the archival dispatch of the crime-process."
https://www.facebook.com/groups/JillHavernCompleteMysteryofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/1762479357329883/