Meghan is in the process of suing publisher Associated Newspapers (ANL), after two of its papers — the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline — published extracts of a handwritten letter the Duchess wrote to her father. Meghan’s letter to Thomas Markle was sent after her 2018 wedding, and she has claimed that publishing it has breached her privacy and copyright. However, ANL defended itself and said Meghan had already violated her own privacy when she allowed five of her friends to speak to People Magazine.
One of her friends mentioned the letter in the interview, which reportedly prompted Mr Markle to show it to the press in February 2019.
While Meghan won the battle to keep her friends’ identities anonymous a few months ago, the court case faced a new development in September.
ANL decided to amend its defence claim to include the new pro-Sussex biography ‘Finding Freedom’ in its case — with the High Court judge’s approval.
Antony White QC for ANL said in written submissions that ‘Finding Freedom’ gave “every appearance of having been written with their [the Sussexes’] extensive cooperation”.
‘Finding Freedom’ includes extracts on the letter, just like the contested articles from the MailOnline and the Mail on Sunday.
However, both Meghan’s representatives and authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand have denied that they collaborated for the text.
Meghan’s attorney, Justin Rushbrooke QC, claimed the authors “were not given the impression that the claimant wanted the contents of the letter to be reproduced in the book”, and said the extracts were taken from the Mail’s original articles instead.
The Duchess of Sussex is set to appear in court in January, and sources recently told Vanity Fair that there will be “no wavering” in the run-up to the 10-day trial.
However, independent media disputes lawyer Emily Cox, who is not actively working on the case, suggested that Meghan bow out of the lawsuit now.
Speaking to Express.co.uk, Ms Cox speculated: “Associated Newspapers’ successful bid to include the ‘Finding Freedom’ biography in its defence could prove to be the fatal blow to the Duchess’ claim that she had an expectation of privacy in the letter to her father.
“And it will certainly mean yet more dissection of her personal life when this case goes to trial in January of next year.”
READ MORE: Kate controversy shows William shares Harry’s trait in royal rows
Ms Cox is a partner of Stewarts law firm, which claims it is the UK’s leading litigation-only firm. The business specialises in high-value and complex disputes.
She suggested ANL’s decision to incorporate ‘Finding Freedom’ into its defence has the potential to derail Meghan’s claim that the publishers violated her privacy.
Extracts of the letter were included in the book — but the Duchess of Sussex has not shown any intention of suing the biography, while pursuing a lawsuit against ANL.
This could therefore become the “fatal blow” the legal commentator is referring to.
Ms Cox also noted that if the case proceeds to trial, the judge could still remove the anonymity for Meghan’s five friends who spoke to People.
She noted that if the case proceeds to trial, the judge could still remove the anonymity for Meghan’s five friends who spoke to People.
She continued: “It is therefore difficult to see how she can emerge a winner from this case even if she succeeds on the pure legal points at trial.”
DON’T MISS
Real reason Kate ‘did not invite Meghan shopping’ amid snub claims [INSIGHT]
‘Isolated’ Prince Harry’s birthday plan sparked questions over guests [EXPOSED]
Meghan Markle’s struggles ‘stem from Princess Margaret’s affair’ [EXPLAINED]
She continued: “It is therefore difficult to see how she can emerge a winner from this case even if she succeeds on the pure legal points at trial.”
The independent lawyer also opined the trial is likely to bring a forensic examination of Meghan’s life and shine a light on her privacy – which is one of the main reasons she and Harry chose to leave the Royal Family back in January.
She added: “If her privacy is paramount, the Duchess should be thinking about ways to exit this litigation gracefully.
“For example, she might take the position that she is not prepared to throw to the wolves her five friends who collaborated with People, and who could well lose their anonymity at trial.
“An expensive option, given she will have to pick up the tab for Associated Newspapers’ costs, but one which may be worth its weight in gold.”
Yet, an insider told Vanity Fair last month that Meghan was under no illusion as to how expensive the lawsuit would be, and “she feels as strongly” as she did when she first filed the proceedings in October last year.
They explained: “It’s costing a lot of money, but no one has been in the dark about the scale of this and what it’s going to cost.”
Meghan has reportedly spent £1.8million on the lawsuit so far, with ANL forking out £1.2million.
Speaking during the costs and case management hearing last month, the Duchess’ representative Jessie Bowhill said: “At the broad brush level, £1.8million is a reasonable and proportionate amount for a seven to 10-day trial in the High Court in a case concerning private information, personal data and intellectual property rights of a high-profile individual.”
