Prince Harry, Meghan Lose ‘Privacy’ Legal Battle With Daily Mail

Hamilton Nwosa
Writer

Ad

What weapons China put on display at its military parade

Chinese President Xi Jinping oversaw a massed military parade in central Beijing on Wednesday to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War Two. Here are some of the weapons China's People's Liberation Army put on rare public display in a show of its growing prowess and ability to project power far from…

Trump accuses Xi of conspiring against US with Putin and Kim

US President Donald Trump has accused Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping of conspiring against the US with the leaders of Russia and North Korea. Trump's comments came as China hosted world leaders at its largest-ever Victory Day parade in Beijing on Wednesday - a showcase of China's military might. In a post on Truth Social, Trump…

Oil Prices Hold Steady After U.S. Sanctions on Iranian Crude Scheme

Crude oil prices stabilized today after inching up on Tuesday following the news of new U.S. sanctions on people involved in exporting Iranian crude disguised as Iraqi crude. At the time of writing, Brent crude was trading at $68.93 per barrel and West Texas Intermediate was trading at $65.42 per barrel, both slightly down from opening. On Tuesday, the…

Ad

The Duchess of Sussex has lost the first round in her legal fight with Associated Newspapers.

She dragged the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online to court over alleged breached of privacy after they published excerpts from private correspondence between her and her estranged father, Thomas Markle.

However, on Friday, 1 May, Mr. Justice Warby ruled against the Duchess and her husband, Prince Harry, who had claimed the newspaper had acted dishonestly.

​The judge ruled it was “irrelevant.”

He added that “Such issues are assessed objectively. The claimant’s arguments that motive and state of mind are among the circumstances to be considered are contrary to Campbell v MGN Ltd (the legal precedent involving supermodel Naomi Campbell).”

The Duchess was outraged when the Mail on Sunday published an article in February 2019.

It was published under the headline: “Revealed, the letter showing true tragedy of Meghan’s rift with a father she says has ‘broken her heart into a million pieces’.”

At a hearing on 24 April Associated Newspapers’ lawyer, Anthony White QC, had asked the judge to dismiss two aspects of the Duchess’s claim – that the newspaper had acted with “dishonesty” and “malice” in the way it had edited the excerpts and that the publication of the letter excerpts should be considered in the light of nine other articles which were “generally unfavourable to the defendant as one of those tabloid newspapers which had been deliberately seeking to dig or stir up issues between her and her father.”

The Duchess, 38, is seeking compensation under Article 82 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and section 168 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

The Mail Online claimed the letters “revealed she is a ‘narcissistic showman whose self-control is wavering’.”

Meghan Markle married Prince Harry in May 2018 and the couple had a son, Archie, last year but they have consistently complained about British tabloid media intrusion into their private lives and decided recently to move to the US and eschew their royal duties.

As part of the lawsuit, she has launched against Associated Newspapers, the Duchess is demanding all copies of the letter she wrote to her father.

In the hearing on 24 April, Mr Sherborne said the Mail had “harassed and humiliated” Mr Markle, who is 75, and “exposed him as a royal scammer” and then manipulated “this vulnerable man” to get hold of the letter.

Mr White said there had been no dishonesty on the part of the journalist, Caroline Graham – the Mail on Sunday’s US editor, and there was no proof anyone else at the Mail had acted dishonestly.

(Sputnik/NAN)

Ad

X whatsapp