Meghan Markle scores sensational and final win over Mail Online

Meghan Markle scored a stunning — and ultimately — victory in her lengthy legal action against the publishers of Daily mail, NS Mail on Sunday and Online email today, after a judge dismissed an appeal by Associated Newspaper Limited (ANL) publishers against her.

Meghan sued ANL for invasion of her privacy and copyright infringement after ANL published the extension of a “deeply personal” her handwritten letter to her estranged father Thomas Markle shortly after her wedding to Prince Harry.

Earlier this year, a senior judge, who has extensive experience in media law, granted Meghan a so-called “summary ruling”.

This means that the original judge, Lord Justice Warby, has unilaterally decided there is absolutely no prospect of ANL succeeding in his attempt to defend himself against Meghan’s actions, and is therefore calling for a halt to the proceedings. continue to favor Meghan, without conducting a full trial.

ANL appealed the decision, saying the case at least deserved a trial in court.

However, their argument was rejected by the Court of Appeals today, although ANL has presented remarkable new evidence: a witness statement from Meghan’s former communications director, Jason Knauf, to saw that Meghan had briefly talked about the author of the book. Searching for freedom, which she had long denied.

Meghan was forced to admit in court that she “forgot” to send Knauf a lengthy email armed with specific summaries of the authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand.

The presiding judge, Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls, said: “At best, this is an unfortunate loss of her memory, but disregard the matter.”

Knauf also provided more damaging evidence against Meghan, including a set of messages from her that said she sent the letter to “dad”, specifically so if her dad did leak it, it will “pulling the heart wire.”

ANL said this new evidence suggests Meghan wrote the letter in consultation with her press office and with the expectation it would be leaked and she should therefore have expectations of privacy all around. it is different from another private letter.

However, Vos denies this, saying the new evidence “doesn’t help much” on the matter at hand.

ANL also argued that it was Meghan who caused the letter to enter the public domain when five of her friends gave interviews. Everyone journal to which they referred to the letter, its characterization, ANL said, was incorrect.

ANL said it only asked Thomas Markle for permission to respond and edit records.

The judge blasted the claim, saying the publication “was not a reasonable or proportionate means of correcting inaccuracies about the letter contained in an article published February 6, 2005. 2019 in Everyone Journal. The point is Mail on Sunday The articles focused on disclosing the letter’s contents, rather than providing Mr. Markle’s response to the attack on him in Everyone Journal.”

Vos added that Letter from title: “Reveal: The letter presents the true tragedy of Meghan’s fractured relationship with a father who she says has ‘broken her heart into a million pieces'” clearly shows “that Mail on Sunday the articles were launched as a new public revelation of excerpts from the Duchess’ letter to her father, rather than her father’s response to what Everyone magazine wrote. ”

Meghan denies she has authorized friends to speak to Everyone or that she intended to let the letter leak, merely arguing that she understood it could happen and wanted to prepare for it.

Vos concluded: “While it may be appropriate to publish a very small portion of the letter for that purpose, it is not necessary to publish half of the letter as the Associated Newspaper has done.”

Meghan’s resounding victory today will draw the final line of the case and remove the humiliating prospect of her being cross-examined in open court.