Meghan Markle recently launched a new series of lawsuits against members of the British press, and in particular the Mail on Sunday. One of those lawsuits has been decided, and it was not in Meghan's favor.
The premise is more or less this: Meghan's team was asserting that the Mail on Sunday played a large role in manipulating her father, Thomas Markle, into working against her. Her team also said that it's possible the Mail on Sunday even gave her father "scripts" to use in interviews.
In a recent hearing, the Mail on Sunday managed to have certain parts of Meghan's lawsuit thrown out, which works to the publication's advantage. But while the judge ruled that these parts should be removed for now, he also allowed that they could be reintroduced.
The judge said, "Some of the allegations are struck out as irrelevant to the purpose for which they are pleaded. Some are struck out on the further or alternative ground that they are inadequately detailed. I have also acted so as to confine the case to what is reasonably necessary and proportionate for the purpose of doing justice between these parties."
The judge also added, "I do not consider that the allegations struck out on that basis go to the ‘heart’ of the case, which at its core concerns the publication of five articles disclosing the words of, and information drawn from, the letter written by the claimant to her father in August 2018. Some aspects of the case that I have struck out at this stage may be revived if they are put in proper form."
The core of the lawsuit asserts that the Mail on Sunday didn't have a right to publish a private letter that Meghan wrote to her father. The additional analysis helps clarify the position of everyone involved. Essentially, the judge is asking Meghan's team to refocus what their lawsuit is really about.
Journalist Omid Scobie, who is friendly with both Meghan and Harry, explained it this way on his Twitter feed:
“Judge based decision to strike out additional elements on a few grounds:
— Publisher’s motive is not relevant in a privacy claim
— Litigating the issues would be disproportionately complicated
— Elements had been introduced in a way that did not meet some procedural requirements.”
The Mail on Sunday has also admitted that this ruling doesn't really impact much, and Meghan's team could still win the lawsuit itself.
“It was conceded by Mail on Sunday’s legal rep that this ruling will not affect Meghan’s ability ‘to get home’ on the case.
"The duchess is not appealing and the case — focusing on infringement of privacy, breach of copyright and violation of data protection laws — moves forward."
The lawsuit will now move forward, and Meghan's team has commented that they were surprised by the ruling:
"We are surprised to see that his ruling suggests that dishonest behaviour is not relevant. We feel honesty and integrity are at the core of what matters; or as it relates to the Mail on Sunday and Associated Newspapers, their lack thereof. Nonetheless, we respect the Judge’s decision as the strong case against Associated will continue to focus on the issue of a private, intimate and hand-written letter from a daughter to her father that was published by The Mail on Sunday. This gross violation of any person’s right to privacy is obvious and unlawful, and The Mail on Sunday should be held to account for their actions."
Antony White QC, who is part of the Associated Newspapers legal team, says that he is surprised that Meghan is asserting so much knowledge of what Thomas was doing or saying: "The claimant [Meghan] has seen fit to put these allegations on the record without having spoken to Mr Markle, verifying these allegations with him or obtaining his consent. It is therefore highly unlikely that she has any credible basis for these allegations of impropriety towards him."
Royal followers have also commented that this setback doesn't seem like much of a win for the Mail on Sunday. One woman commented on Twitter that it's actually a fail: "All I learned from last week court is that the publisher of Mail on Sunday doesn't deny they organized a campaign against Meghan, they just think those 9 articles were not pertinent information for the privacy and copyright lawsuit."
Others have commented that Meghan and Harry are doing a lot to expose the seedy underbelly of tabloids in the UK just by launching the lawsuits at all.
"They have exposed the Racist British Tabloids to the rest of the world. To me, that's a big win. Now we know that 99% are made up lies. The world has witnessed how badly she was treated. So glad they left this toxic island. Hope they never return."
The lawsuit will likely take months until it reaches completion. It is one of several that Meghan and Harry have waged against the British press. Meghan is also including three articles that were published in the Daily Mail Online as part of her lawsuit. The articles each included parts of a letter she wrote Thomas following her wedding to Harry.
The implications of the lawsuit could be huge, with some noting that the suit could even change how tabloids operate in the UK. Harry won a legal dispute last year against Splash News, after he alleged that the company violated his privacy by photographing the home he and Meghan lived in.
Both Harry and Meghan have also been outspoken about how they have been treated by the press. Last year, Harry said, "For these select media this is a game, and one that we have been unwilling to play from the start. I have been a silent witness to her private suffering for too long. To stand back and do nothing would be contrary to everything we believe in."
He added, "Put simply, it is bullying, which scares and silences people. We all know this isn't acceptable, at any level. We won't and can't believe in a world where there is no accountability for this."
Harry and Meghan are funding their lawsuits themselves, and they will donate any damages they may be awarded to an anti-bullying charity.
