Harry & Meghan: Legal Actions against the Media

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Thanks for posting this, Madame Verseau. It is indeed a very interesting document, especially in setting out specifically the many times Meghan and Harry tried to contact her father, and his minimalist responses to their calls.

IMO it's not likely that any witnesses will be called in the March 2 hearing, unless Jason Knauf wants to join the copyright case! Nor do I believe that the Fail will appeal, considering that they've been told there's not much chance of success, on the privacy issue at least. I think the hearing will just consist of the rival lawyers arguing over costs and Meghan's amount of damages.

I agree with this. Reading the filing, it is pretty clear that an appeal has very slim changes of actually being granted. In fact the judge all but called it pointless. So unless Jason Knauf is challenging his copyright than the copyright issue is also pretty moot. It is only really about damages anyways and if they would be shared. Now the March 2 hearing will be about how much they will have to fork over.

[Curryong]

With regard to Meghan's court case, she won an interim order for costs a few hours ago, when Justice Warby ordered the newspaper group defendants to pay £450,000. I have a link to the report on this, but can't post in the appropriate thread as it is closed.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal...t-royal-family

Is it possible for it to be reopened at all please, as there were various legal arguments from the two sides that might be of interest to posters?

[AC21091968]

Chris Ship has tweeted out and written/contribute an article on ITV that The Mail on Sunday is ordered to pay 90% of Meghan's legal cost.

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
NEW: The Duchess of Sussex asks the High Court to order the Mail on Sunday to hand over copies over her private letter to her father Thomas Markle which was the crux of the privacy case she won against the newspaper last month.
11:50 PM · Mar 2, 2021·Twitter Web App

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
Replying to @chrisshipitv
Meghan asks Mail on Sunday to publish an apology "on a page no later than page 4" and "in a font and size" no smaller than the original story about her letter to Thomas Markle.
11:56 PM · Mar 2, 2021·Twitter Web App

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
Replying to @chrisshipitv
Meghan's lawyers also demand the Mail on Sunday prints "a statement on the front page" which says "the Duchess of Sussex wins her legal case for copyright infringement against Associated Newspapers for articles published in the Mail on Sunday and posted on Mail Online".
11:58 PM · Mar 2, 2021·Twitter Web App

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
Replying to @chrisshipitv
As for Mail Online, Meghan has asked that the notice that she has one her legal case be placed on the home page of the news website "for a period of not less than 6 months, together with a hyperlink to the Judgement".
12:04 AM · Mar 3, 2021·Twitter Web App

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
Replying to @chrisshipitv
Meghan's lawyers say her legal costs are estimated at £1.5 million and they have requested that a "payment on account of almost 50% of these costs, in the sum of £750,000, should be ordered to be paid" within 14 days.
12:10 AM · Mar 3, 2021·Twitter Web App

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
Replying to @chrisshipitv
High Court Judge rules the Mail on Sunday should pay 90% of the costs incurred by Meghan's side for the Summary Judgement Application - which is a rough calculation says Mr Justice Warby of the costs incurred "on matters on which she succeeded".
Mail had wanted to pay only 75%
1:37 AM · Mar 3, 2021·Twitter Web App

https://twitter.com/chrisshipitv/sta...32763932590080

Mail on Sunday ordered to pay 90% of Meghan's costs for Summary Judgement
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-02/...-to-her-father

[Curryong]

Good. I'm extremely glad to hear it and will be interested to see the Mail on Sunday's apology published.

[poppy7]

Going a bit over the top. They need to settle down.

[Curryong]

Who are 'they'? If the Mail on Sunday had won the case there wouldn't have been any settling down. They and their sister papers would have been cock a hoop for weeks.

[poppy7]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Who are 'they'? If the Mail on Sunday had won the case there wouldn't have been any settling down. They and their sister papers would have been cock a hoop for weeks.

Hardly. They win and loose this things all the time.

Meghan and Harry need to settle down. Why on earth would you put this on the website for six months. Nobody wants to see that

This is small fries....Levenson now that was big...and every single person attached to that acted with dignity.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Who are 'they'? If the Mail on Sunday had won the case there wouldn't have been any settling down. They and their sister papers would have been cock a hoop for weeks.

You bet they would of, front page!



LaRae

[SLV]

Originally Posted by poppy7

Hardly. They win and loose this things all the time.

Meghan and Harry need to settle down. Why on earth would you put this on the website for six months. Nobody wants to see that

This is small fries....Levenson now that was big...and every single person attached to that acted with dignity.

On the contrary. Rectifications like this *should* be put on the front page, and for a long time. The Mail earned a lot of money with their headlines, and then get away with a small rectification somewhere in the back of the edition? No way!

[poppy7]

Originally Posted by SLV

On the contrary. Rectifications like this *should* be put on the front page, and for a long time. The Mail earned a lot of money with their headlines, and then get away with a small rectification somewhere in the back of the edition? No way!

I would argue this serves no one as it keeps your name in the press constantly. And the story fresh in peoples mind.

That reparations are reflective of how much that story made for the paper is what it should be.

[Curryong]

Apologies if this has already been posted but the newspaper group has been refused leave to appeal the case Meghan brought against the Mail on Sunday, which it lost. Justice Warby said there was no hope of success.

An interim award has been ordered to be given to Meghan by him to pay for some of her legal costs but there will be a further hearing to award final costs to Meghan plus other other matters finalised in April or May.


https://pressgazette.co.uk/meghan-ma...age-statement/

[Curryong]

Justice Warby ordered that the Mail on Sunday publish an apology to Meghan on its front page as a result of this judgement, in font no smaller than was used when the newspaper published the letter to her father. It also ordered that the judgement against the paper be put on its website and kept there for a week.

https://www.firstpost.com/entertainm...s-9385151.html

[Moonmaiden23]

This makes me happy. The Fail has been out of control for YEARS.

[Moran]

Good. You can't just post private letters, no matter what. And I'm saying this as someone who believes that Meghan intentionally violated her own privacy multiple times, including the case with the letter. They could have just posted the relevant parts.

[Curryong]

Sun investigator and the illegal information he obtained on Meghan for his employers, early in the relationship with Harry.

The https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-meghan-markle

[MaiaMia_53]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Sun investigator and the illegal information he obtained on Meghan for his employers, early in the relationship with Harry.

The https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-meghan-markle

Thanks @Curryong. I am up early to do some work, and I happened to see this news. My goodness how deep down the rabbit hole will the nastiness against Meghan and Harry ultimately be revealed to have descended? I hope it all comes out, every last bit of the negative campaigns against them from all quarters.

Other news outlets are beginning to report on this. There is apparently an article in The New York Times, which references Byline Investigates coverage, neither of which I have seen yet. But it is mentioned in this MSN.com report:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainm...eact-to-u-k-ta

This news reminds me of the Daily Fail having offered to pay a minor actor acquaintance of Meghan's to tell lies about having had an intimate relationship with her, when in fact he didn't.

I hope all of the receipts will add up to the point where the depths of the smear campaign against Meghan can not continue to be ignored, dismissed, twisted, and swept under the rug.

[Heavs]

It should be noted that whilst awful, invasive, wrong and everything else this isn't in anyway only a smear campaign against Meghan. This is the same newspaper group who is *still* being sued by some celebrities including Harry for the phone hacking scandal.

Harry, Chelsea, William and Kate among many others were hacked hundreds of times:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...155-times.html

This would have happened to any one who was publicly dating Prince Harry. That doesn't mean it was right and of course it should be thoroughly investigated. Meghan did have it tough with some of the press but it wasn't unique to her.

[MaiaMia_53]

With everything that M&H are facing and have been subjected to in the U.K. media, and with all that Byline Investigates and other outlets have revealed about surreptitious actions taken against Meghan at the start of their relationship, through their marriage, through their tenure as senior royals, and up to the present day, it is clear to me that there has been an orchestrated smear campaign, specifically against Meghan. And there have been aspersions and belittling comments against Harry as well, in addition to documented death threats. All of this far surpasses what most other royal girlfriends or members of the firm have been subjected to.

Yes, many others in the firm, and some of those who have been associated with members of the royal family have been overly scrutinized, but still not to the negative, vitriolic level that Meghan has experienced. The fact that the Daily Fail was willing to pay an actor acquaintance of Meghan's to lie about having a nonexistent sexual relationship with her is beyond the bounds and completely reprehensible.

I've heard that Byline Investigates reported about the private investigator's activities months ago, but the news is only now reaching mainstream headlines.

[Fem]

Oh, welcome in this hell again. I seriously do not understand how - because I think it's been dragging for some 10+ years by this point - people like that were not stopped in any way from doing this again.

But I agree, this is not in any way a "smear campaign" against Meghan. And at least she didn't have her voicemails plastered all over public domain, so at least there's that...

[Alisa]

Just saw this..absolutely ridiculous! They should be sued!