Meghan Markle's Privacy Case Hits Another Snag
The latest development in Meghan Markle's ongoing privacy case against the publishers of the Mail on Sunday (Associated Newspapers Limited) involves Finding Freedom, a buzzy new biography of the Sussexes from royal reporters Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, published just last month.
The Duchess is suing Associated Newspapers for alleged breach of privacy, infringement of copyright, and breach of the 2018 Data Protection Act after extracts of a private letter she wrote to her father, Thomas Markle, were published in the Mail on Sunday.
During a pre-trial hearing at the High Court in London today, Associated Newspapers asked to amend their written evidence to include a claim that Meghan "co-operated with the authors of the recently published book Finding Freedom to put out their version of certain events," per Sky News.
Antony White QC, representing Associated Newspapers, reportedly said the book gave "every appearance of having been written with their [Meghan and Harry's] extensive co-operation."
Meghan's lawyers had previously refuted claims that she "caused or permitted information to be provided directly or indirectly to, and co-operated with, the authors of the book."
But, according to ITV's Chris Ship, the judge concluded that Associated Newspapers could use the book in the case. "Judge Francesca Kaye allowed the publisher to amend its defence to rely on Finding Freedom, saying the amended defence did not raise 'new defences,' but simply added 'further particulars' to the Mail on Sunday's case."
Ship also notes: "The judge refused a request from Meghan's barrister, Justin Rushbrook QC, to appeal against her decision."
A spokesperson for Shillings, the legal firm representing Meghan has since responded to today's outcome.
“The Court has today stated that The Mail on Sunday will be allowed to amend its legal defence for trial regardless of whether that defence is accurate or true, which based on legally sworn witness statements refuting the newspaper’s arguments, it is not. The Mail has been allowed to prolong this action and try contending its amended defence at trial, where we have no doubt it will fail. This defence has no merit and is in fact false,” reads the statement.
“We were prepared for this potential outcome given the low threshold to amend a pleading for a privacy and copyright case. The Master made clear that if The Mail on Sunday’s defence is indeed weak and without evidence, it would be a house of cards and fall down at trial,” it continues.
“This latest hearing was unfortunately another step in a case that has already been drawn out by a defendant who uses the legal process to exploit The Duchess’s privacy and the privacy of those around her for profit-motivated clickbait rather than journalism. As a reminder, it is The Mail on Sunday and Associated Newspapers who acted unlawfully and are the ones on trial, not The Duchess of Sussex, although they would like their readers to believe otherwise.”
You Might Also Like
