Meghan ain’t happy with the court’s decision


Meghan Markle suffers massive setback in war against press and faces thousands in costs after judge throws out multiple claims against Mail on Sunday in father’s letter case

  • Meghan Markle suing publisher of Mail on Sunday for printing letter to her father
  • She claims article in 2019 breached her privacy, copyright and data protection 
  • Associated Newspapers disputes claims and argued parts of case be thrown out 
  • Mr Justice Warby today ‘struck out’ significant parts of her case ahead of trial  
  • Duchess will give evidence in High Court – with her father Thomas against her


Judge to rule in latest stage of Harry and Meghan’s legal battle over Thomas Markle letter

A High Court judge will today hand down his ruling in the latest stage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s legal battle over a letter she sent to her dad.

The Duchess of Sussex launched legal action against Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, after it printed a “private and confidential” handwritten note she sent to her father Thomas Markle.

The former actress is seeking damages from Associated Newspapers Ltd for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and breach of the Data Protection Act.

Lawyers for the publisher last week asked for parts of the Duchess’ case to be struck out during a virtual hearing.

And Mr Justice Warby will deliver his ruling on Associated Newspapers’ application at noon today.

Meghan Markle court case: Allegations by Duchess over estranged father ‘objectionable’

Claims by the Duchess of Sussex that articles were responsible for “causing” the dispute between her and her estranged father were “objectionable”, the High Court has heard. Lawyers for Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, said Meghan’s contention that her “vulnerable” father was “harassed and humiliated”, “manipulated” and “exploited” should not form part of her case.

He added: “In this context it appears that the claimant 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 (she admits … that she has had no contact with him since the wedding).

You have to read this entire article!

“It is therefore highly unlikely that she has any credible basis for these allegations of impropriety towards him, or that proper particulars could be given.”


He added: “It is extremely common for the media to summarise or edit documents when reporting current events, and that is not a basis for an allegation of dishonesty.


“It is open to the claimant to say, as she does, that the presentation of the letter was misleading – which is firmly denied – but there is no basis for her to allege that anyone working for the defendant was dishonest in the drafting and editing process.”

Mr White also said Associated Newspapers wrote to Meghan’s lawyers on April 6, stating Friday’s hearing should be avoided if possible because of the Covid-19 pandemic, and offering not to seek costs if the disputed parts of her claim were withdrawn.

However, he said the duchess’s legal team at Schillings law firm replied on April 16, saying she “considered it was unreasonable to accept the offer”.

JD 🥰

Meghan, Thomas and the letter


Meghan’s “five friends”