The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Mm11

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Regist10

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Adrienne Page QC

Post by Ribisl on 01.02.13 19:56

Advised Gerry and Kate McCann in relation to their libel actions against Express newspapers.

Testimonials
Named "Defamation Silk of the Year" in the Chambers & Partners Bar Awards 2010.

Recommended as a "Leading Silk" in defamation and privacy in both Chambers & Partners and Legal 500 every year since taking silk.

She has been described, in recent entries, as: a 'canny class act' … is valued for being conscientious and hard-working.

"She's very strategic, bonds well with clients and transmits her arguments to the court beautifully," say observers. Page represented Simon Singh against the British Chiropractic Association at first instance and on his successful appeal(Chambers & Partners, 2010)

http://www.5rb.com/member/Adrienne_Page%20QC

____________________
There is a taint of death, a flavour of mortality in lies... Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad
avatar
Ribisl

Posts : 807
Join date : 2012-02-04

Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Re: Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Post by Guest on 01.02.13 20:04

@jay2001 wrote:What a generous offer, so heart warming. Have they seen the light after posting a quote by the Dalai Lama on one of their website/facebook yesterday. The gist of which is if you can't help someone don't hurt them. We know the abductor is forgiven so why the vicious, vindictive vendetta against TB and Dr A?

If Tony loses and is bankrupted and/or imprisoned what happens about the libel trial? Will it go ahead or will tm change their minds as they've done with Dr A? Sadly I doubt the UK media will report on this and it's only us in forumland who know far more than the papers and news tell us. At least twitter is getting the message out there, will that be the next cause for tm & Co?

I love that: Forumland.
You know where it is?

In the vast continent of EuForia, the abode of the Righteous.

As opposed to Desparia, where their antipodes sojourn in utter, forlorn and perpetual darkness. Forever.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Re: Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Post by Guest on 01.02.13 20:07

@Monty Heck wrote:Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty C.Edwards Today at 4:49 pm


"It is possible - maybe even probable - that, should Tony be able to make a good enough representation, the judge (if not Tugendhat) will agree with Tugendhat's words that the proper way to resolve this is a full libel trial and this *may* help explain just why the McCanns side appear to be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They will in all probability be going all out to try and dissuade the judge from going anywhere near this course of action. At the very least I would expect any judge to ask the question along the lines of, "why are you so determined to nail this particular person...?""

This may indeed go some way to explain the extent of the legal might employed against Mr Bennett. The latest CR letter is quite explicit on how grave these proceedings are for their clients as well as TB and a judgement that there will be a hearing to decide whether any libel has in fact occurred would be a serious consequence indeed for the McCs. The purpose of the additional QC may therefore be to ensure that possibility is minimised as far as is humanly possible. Nobody racks up an additional £32 in legal costs to be fairer to their opponent and all that is being done is making "inequality of arms" even more so. It would be interesting to hear the answer if the judge did ask the above question but perhaps the team would need an adjournment to take clients' advice before answering.

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 410353720
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Re: Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Post by Guest on 01.02.13 20:14

@C.Edwards wrote:Judges ask counsel for advice, legal references and case citation references (i.e. which page in the book is that...?)

Counsel has to be honest in answering any questions even if it harms the argument for "their" side.

It is an entirely valid legal argument that Carter Ruck are putting forward, even if it doesn't look that way at face value.

This is a committal hearing, there is nothing to settle. I believe the McCanns could withdraw their application for contempt of court but I doubt that Tony would insist on appearing in court to argue his case in that event.

As to the case being thrown out of court:
STRIKING OUT

5. The court may, on application by the respondent or on its own initiative, strike out a
committal application if it appears to the court:
(1) that the committal application and the evidence served in support of it disclose no reasonable
ground for alleging that the respondent is guilty of a contempt of court;
(2) that the committal application is an abuse of the court’s process or, if made in existing
proceedings, is otherwise likely to obstruct the just disposal of those proceedings; or
(3) that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order.
(CPR Part 3 contains general powers for the management by the court)

and

8. A committal application may not be discontinued without the permission of the court.

I'm sure that I will be accused of spreading doom and gloom again, but I'm just explaining how these sorts of proceedings work for those (there appear to be many) who don't know.

Whilst researching this, I found an interesting (to me) point of law on the committal proceedings that I didn't know was there. I'm sure Tony "already knows this" Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 302873 but just in case there are others that don't:

If you consider the allegations are not true you must tell the court why. If it is established that
they are true, you must tell the court of any good reason why they do not amount to a
contempt of court, or, if they do, why you should not be punished

What is interesting in this is that it clearly demonstrates an opportunity for Tony to "have his say" regardless of whether he is found to be in contempt or not. I didn't realise that this opportunity existed at a committal hearing. Whether or not he is able to demonstrate his case to a sufficient level of proof or not, he will at least be able to raise his arguments he's mentioned on here. It is possible - maybe even probable - that, should Tony be able to make a good enough representation, the judge (if not Tugendhat) will agree with Tugendhat's words that the proper way to resolve this is a full libel trial and this *may* help explain just why the McCanns side appear to be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They will in all probability be going all out to try and dissuade the judge from going anywhere near this course of action. At the very least I would expect any judge to ask the question along the lines of, "why are you so determined to nail this particular person...?"

You a judge yourself by any means? I love reading your very insightful comments.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Contradicting PJ files

Post by Guest on 01.02.13 21:06

I have received this message in support of Tony:

Message subject : [Contact] Contradicting PJ files

Message content :

Would Mr Bennett have been hounded if he had publicly contradicted the police
files? If he said the PJ were wrong would the PJ try to prosecute him? I doubt
it, they would have ignored him. We know why the McCanns can not ignore him.

I don't like posting on forums so this is the 2nd PM I have sent but please do
pass on my message that my thoughts are with Tony. He will succeed regardless of
what any court decides, they are mere people not infallible. (Well, apart from
the Pope)
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Re: Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Post by sonic72 on 01.02.13 21:54

Wow! They are spending more money on legal costs on this case, than they have spent on trying to 'find' Maddy!

They have no intention of really searching for her, they have not done anything that even suggests they are really looking for maddy.

I hope they get screwed in court.

____________________

sonic72
sonic72

Posts : 342
Join date : 2012-09-09

Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Re: Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Post by Inspectorfrost on 01.02.13 22:10

@sonic72 wrote:Wow! They are spending more money on legal costs on this case, than they have spent on trying to 'find' Maddy!

They have no intention of really searching for her, they have not done anything that even suggests they are really looking for maddy.

I hope they get screwed in court.
big grin
agree


Seems their argument is people have stopped looking because of what some might say in public. They cannot prove a single person who ever was or is looking STILL after all these years, and there are many, if you read their facebook page and buying their merchandise to publicise Madeleine on top of the worlds biggest ever publicity campaign, and still donating and helping in other ways, have ever stopped because they read some pamphlet or any book. OR that any lerson who had suspicions about the abduction and or read any books would NOT report a sighting if they saw her. Its a very weak argumet IMO. Madeleine M is not the only missing child in the world either. People will stop looking naturally if they did at all, after a very very short time. Unlike parents who should spendevery penny onthe actual searchand investigation and NONE on vexatious costly litigations. might also help if they dish outhalf a million quid to fraudsters before checking them out. or forking out 40k for a ten page website.
avatar
Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Join date : 2012-12-09

Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Re: Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Post by C.Edwards on 01.02.13 22:11

@Portia wrote:snip...

What is interesting in this is that it clearly demonstrates an opportunity for Tony to "have his say" regardless of whether he is found to be in contempt or not. I didn't realise that this opportunity existed at a committal hearing. Whether or not he is able to demonstrate his case to a sufficient level of proof or not, he will at least be able to raise his arguments he's mentioned on here. It is possible - maybe even probable - that, should Tony be able to make a good enough representation, the judge (if not Tugendhat) will agree with Tugendhat's words that the proper way to resolve this is a full libel trial and this *may* help explain just why the McCanns side appear to be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They will in all probability be going all out to try and dissuade the judge from going anywhere near this course of action. At the very least I would expect any judge to ask the question along the lines of, "why are you so determined to nail this particular person...?"

You a judge yourself by any means? I love reading your very insightful comments.[/quote]

Hahahahaha... sorry. No, I'm not a judge. Thankyou for your kind words though. I feel there are very few on this board that feel the same way you do though Portia!
avatar
C.Edwards

Posts : 144
Join date : 2011-05-13

Back to top Go down

Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower - Page 3 Empty Re: Carter-Ruck explain why they've appointed Adrienne Page Q.C. to beef up their legal firepower

Post by Pyrite on 01.02.13 23:47

A number of years ago I genuinely considered the case i have been a part of as a hoax - which is why a group of us went on to prove it was!

I'm pretty new to the McCann case and i don't yet know what it is, but as it is somewhat linked to our own case - I'm beginning to learn.

[url=http://www.theholliegreigcoverup.net/hollie-greig---madeleine-mccann.html]
Pyrite
Pyrite

Posts : 35
Join date : 2013-01-27

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum