Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

. wrote:The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”.  

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates. 

maebee wrote:http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html?m=1

. wrote:The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”.  

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter".

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates. 

Can anyone explain what exactly this means. Are the McCs being invited to get court permission for Maddie to be represented during a 30 day period, i.e. is it supposed that such would over-ride the Portuguese judge's decision to say Maddie cannot be represented... am having a slightly 'thick' moment here...

Tony Bennett wrote:Bang goes about one-fifth of their claim, I think.

Down to a mere 950,000 euros or so now (about £800,000)

Clay Regazzoni wrote:What a shambles. Poor Madeleine.

russiandoll wrote:JUST BROKEN ON TWITTER, COPIED FROM THE GA PROJECT SITE  :



 Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial
1 Jun 2014

Judge rules that Kate and Gerry McCann do not possess the authority to sue Gonçalo Amaral in their daughter’s name. 


The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”. 

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates.





[url=http://digg.com/submit?url=http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html&title=Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial][/url][url=http://del.icio.us/post?url=http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html&title=Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial][/url][url=http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html&title=Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial][/url][url=http://technorati.com/faves?add=http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html&title=Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial][/url][url=http://twitter.com/?status=Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial ~ http://pjga.blogspot.com/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html][/url]

russiandoll wrote:

Clay Regazzoni wrote:What a shambles. Poor Madeleine.

  Hi Clay,
             Sober enough to post, hey!  Could you expand a little on your comment above, please?

bobbin wrote:

maebee wrote:http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/ward-of-court-decision-issued-by-judge.html?m=1

. wrote:The judge at the Civil Court of Lisbon who is trying the ‘libel’ case which Kate and Gerry McCann have filed against Gonçalo Amaral and 3 other parties has issued a decision concerning the matter of Madeleine McCann being a Ward of Court.

On the 3rd of January 2014, Gonçalo Amaral had argued before the Lisbon Court that Madeleine’s parents do not possess the necessary power to represent their daughter in this action, since the child had been made a Ward of Court in the United Kingdom.

The judge decided that Mr Amaral should present a certificate of the relevant British judicial ruling. That certificate was delivered to the Court on the 2nd of May, after a lengthy, expensive process.

The judge then had to decide whether or not Madeleine’s parents were entitled to represent their daughter in this lawsuit. In the judge’s recent ruling, it is mentioned that “within the 'Wardship', the High Court holds ultimate responsibility over the child, but it does not suppress or annul the exercise of the parental responsibilities”. The High Court takes control over “the most important decisions for the life” of the child. The judge further considers that “the decision to file a judicial action in the name of the child” is a decision “of the magnitude that is demanded for the agreement or consent of the court”.

The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”.  

The text continues with the consideration that because Madeleine was made a Ward of the Court on the 2nd of April of 2008, her parents did not possess, in 2009, “the necessary capacity of representation of their daughter to file the present action without the authorization from the British court”.

Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter".

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates. 

Can anyone explain what exactly this means. Are the McCs being invited to get court permission for Maddie to be represented during a 30 day period, i.e. is it supposed that such would over-ride the Portuguese judge's decision to say Maddie cannot be represented... am having a slightly 'thick' moment here...

russiandoll wrote:
The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”. 

stargazer59 wrote:

bobbin wrote:

The text continue

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter".

The judge has proposed the date of 16th June for the final session, but each of the lawyers involved have the possibility of declining said date and suggesting alternative dates. 

Can anyone explain what exactly this means. Are the McCs being invited to get court permission for Maddie to be represented during a 30 day period, i.e. is it supposed that such would over-ride the Portuguese judge's decision to say Maddie cannot be represented... am having a slightly 'thick' moment here...

It reads to me as the Judge saying they did not have authorization when they brought the action, to do so on Madeleines behalf. They will have 30 days  to produce said documentary proof of authorization from the court.

I am probably wrong though, just the way it reads to me

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

russiandoll wrote:

Clay Regazzoni wrote:What a shambles. Poor Madeleine.

  Hi Clay,
             Sober enough to post, hey!  Could you expand a little on your comment above, please?

Hi, yes. It's just that nothing about this poor child's life (or, indeed, probable death) ever seems to be unequivocal.

russiandoll wrote:How I read it, too.... the word standing out is authorisation. The wardship issue seems clear and if this judge does not see how the Mcs can legitimately sue on Maddie's behalf due to the dates, then I imagine a British judge would hold the same opinion.
 This judge is maybe wondering if the Mcs even bothered to take advice on the legal issues surrounding their status re the wardship before trying to sue on behalf of Maddie. If it proves to be the case that either no authorisation was sought, or they asked advice but ignored it, this judge's words on her final summing up and recorded judgment should be interesting.

russiandoll wrote:

 I agree. However, this is about the parents v Amaral and others, and as far as this part of the case is concerned,  Amaral has been vindicated in asking for the wardship issue to be clarified.

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

russiandoll wrote:
The judge’s ruling further notes that the matters that have been brought before the High Court that holds the Wardship have been matters of an “eminently judiciary nature, like the revelation of confidential information and documents, that are related to the child’s disappearance and were in the possession of the local police”. 

It would be highly ironic if it is something discovered among these documents that has led to the current activity.

Watching wrote:'Nevertheless, the judge has decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.'


A written statement to be read out in Court or is Mr going to make an appearance?

canada12 wrote:Seems to me what the judge is saying is that Gerry and Kate didn't have authorization to bring this action on Madeleine's behalf. She wants to see the authorization from the British court which would have allowed them to bring the action on Madeleine's behalf. If there was no authorization, then GA will be acquitted of the part of the court case that has to do with Madeleine. I don't think the judge is saying that Gerry and Kate can get the authorization after the fact. I think the judge is demanding to see proof that the court authorized them to take action on Madeleine's behalf when they started this libel action.

russiandoll wrote:oh dear the pros are not happy...

  Kate and Gerry are the rightful guardians and the jusge is talking bollocks.  As has been said, I would think this is a delaying tactic, probably not just to knobble the libel triali, but also to give certain people more time to cover their tracks

 so annoyed, look at those typos.. is this a suggestion that the judge is corrupt?

 laughable.