Meghan Markle has scored a stunning – and final – victory in a long-running lawsuit against magazine publishers. daily Mail, The mail on sunday And Online mail Today, after a judge dismissed an appeal by publisher Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) against her.
In a statement, Megan criticized the “harmful practices” of tabloids, calling them “a daily failure that divides us.”
“This is a victory not only for me, but for anyone who has ever felt afraid to stand up for what is right,” she said.
Meghan called on people to be “collectively brave enough to reshape the tabloid industry that makes people cruel, and takes advantage of the lies and pain they create.”
Megan accused ANL of postponing the trial and attempting to “misrepresent the facts and manipulate the public (even during the appeal itself), making an unusually complex straight case in order to generate more headlines and sell more newspapers – a model that rewards chaos over truth.”
Meghan added, “As remote as it may seem from your personal life, it isn’t. Tomorrow it could be you. These harmful practices don’t happen once in a blue moon – they are daily failures that divide us, and we all deserve better.”
Meghan was suing ANL for privacy and copyright infringement after ANL published extensive sections of a “very personal” handwritten letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas Markle shortly after her wedding to Prince Harry.
Earlier this year, a high-ranking judge, Lord Justice Warby, who has a wealth of experience in media law, granted Meghan a so-called “expedited judgment”.
This means that he unilaterally decided that there was absolutely no chance of ANL succeeding in their attempt to defend themselves against Meghan’s conduct, and was therefore calling for a halt to the proceedings in Meghan’s favour, without initiating a full trial.
ANL appealed this decision, saying that the case at least deserves to be tried in court.
Today, however, the Court of Appeals validly dismissed their argument, despite the fact that ANL provided exciting new evidence: a witness statement from Megan’s former head of communications Jason Knauf, showing that Meghan had briefed the book’s authors Searching for freedom, something we have long denied.
Meghan was forced to admit to the court that she “forgot” to send a lengthy email to Knauf providing him with specific briefing points for authors Omid Scobie and Caroline Durand.
However, the presiding judge, Sir Geoffrey Foss, Rolls’ chief, said, “This was, at best, an unfortunate demise of memory on her part, but it did not address these issues.”
Knauf also provided more harmful evidence against Megan, including a batch of letters she sent, which stated that she directed the letter to her “father”, specifically so that if her father leaked it, it would “pull her heart strings”.
ANL said this new evidence showed Meghan wrote the letter in consultation with her press office, with the expectation that it would be leaked, and therefore should have had a different expectation of privacy about it than another private letter.
However, Voss refuted this, saying that the new evidence “helps a bit” with the issue at hand.
ANL also argued that Meghan herself caused the message to be placed in the public domain when five of her friends gave an interview to the people A magazine in which they mentioned the letter and described it incorrectly, according to ANL.
ANL said they were only offering Thomas Markle the right to respond and correct the record.
The judge dismissed this claim from the water, saying that the publication “was not a justified or proportionate means of correcting the inaccuracy in the letter contained in an article published on February 6, 2019 in the people magazine. The main point was that a file mail on sunday The articles focused on revealing the contents of the letter, rather than providing Mr. Markle’s response to the attack on him in the the people magazine.”
Voss added that the file Mail Headline: “Revealed: The message showing the true tragedy of Meghan’s feud with a father she says ‘breaking her heart into a million pieces’ clearly shows” that mail on sunday The articles were published as a new public disclosure of excerpts from the Duchess’ letter to her father, rather than her father’s answers to what the people The magazine wrote.
Megan denied that she allowed her friends to talk to her the people Or that she intended to leak the message, arguing only that she understood the matter and wanted to be prepared for the possibility.
“While it may be appropriate to publish a very small portion of the letter for this purpose, it was not necessary to publish half of the contents of the letter as the Associated Newspapers did,” Vos concluded.
Meghan’s landslide victory today would draw a final line in the case, and eliminate the humiliating prospect of her being questioned in open court.