Harry & Meghan: Legal Actions against the Media

[ACO]

Harry and Meghan settle and get an apology from paparazzi agency

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/b...imes&smtyp=cur

[Curryong]

Good! A settlement and apology. That should mean no more drones flying over their property taking unauthorised photos.

[AC21091968]

According to Katie Nicholl on Vanity Fair, Harry has sent a legal warning to The Mail on Sunday for publishing a "false and defamatory” article about his relationship with the Royal Marines

Prince Harry Sends Legal Warning to the Same Newspaper Meghan Markle Is Suing
His lawyers accused the Mail on Sunday of publishing a “false and defamatory” article about his relationship with the British Armed Forces.
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/202...sunday-marines

Link to the Mail on Sunday's article that Harry is directing at: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l-Marines.html

[Curryong]

Good. I'm glad Harry has done this. I wouldn't touch that lying rag with a twenty foot barge pole. If they happened to say the sky is blue I would check it the next time I was outdoors!

[ACO]

Meghan's team has a semi private hearing (media being shut out) tomorrow as it appears she does not want to go to trial and wants the judge to do a ruling based on what has already been presented.

Seems the press are a bit taken back by the fact they have been denied access to this hearing. A judge doesn't typically grant that unless for some specific reasons. I have a theory but shall be an interesting next few days.

And if granted it is clear they won't be in the UK come January.

[evolvingdoors]

Interesting.
So now that FF can be used by the MoS she doesn't want to go to court?
Yea, that's not suspicious at all./sarcasm

[Queen Claude]

The articles I am seeing state that Meghan is requesting a postponement.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...acy-trial.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal...s-prince-harry

ETA:
Chris Ship is tweeting that Meghan is requesting both a postponement and summary judgement.

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 2h
Meghan, Duchess of Sussex has requested a delay to the privacy case she is bringing against the Mail on Sunday. The full hearing was scheduled to begin at the High Court on January 11 2021. A judge will hear the arguments tomorrow.

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 2h
The requested delay is, in part, being laid at the Mail on Sunday's door, as it was the newspaper which applied and won an application to include the Finding Freedom biography in its defence. That has created more work for Meghan's lawyers as they pursue their privacy claim

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 1h
Meghan's legal team is now applying for a "Summary Judgement" which would make the whole trial in January unnecessary. They say it's because they are so confident of their case in law and will argue tomorrow that the case should be determined on a "summary basis".

[evolvingdoors]

Originally Posted by Queen Claude

The articles I am seeing state that Meghan is requesting a postponement.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...acy-trial.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal...s-prince-harry

ETA:
Chris Ship is tweeting that Meghan is requesting both a postponement and summary judgement.

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 2h
Meghan, Duchess of Sussex has requested a delay to the privacy case she is bringing against the Mail on Sunday. The full hearing was scheduled to begin at the High Court on January 11 2021. A judge will hear the arguments tomorrow.

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 2h
The requested delay is, in part, being laid at the Mail on Sunday's door, as it was the newspaper which applied and won an application to include the Finding Freedom biography in its defence. That has created more work for Meghan's lawyers as they pursue their privacy claim

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 1h
Meghan's legal team is now applying for a "Summary Judgement" which would make the whole trial in January unnecessary. They say it's because they are so confident of their case in law and will argue tomorrow that the case should be determined on a "summary basis".

Nope, Summary Judgment is:,
"Summary judgment is a procedure used in civil litigation. Where summary judgment is granted, the proceedings are brought to a prompt end without the need for a full trial."
I am told it is fairly common to apply for, but I still find it odd it is done now.
and it is still seeking to end the case without going to trial and having to provide testimony.
Why now? what has changed? well... Finding Freedom being included in the defense has.

[Curryong]

Meanwhile, on another front, Harry's lawyers sent the Mail on Sunday a warning letter about their 'false and defamatory' article inferring that Harry had totally ignored the Royal Marines since leaving England.

The lawyers stated that in fact Harry had been in touch with various officers of the Marines on a regular private and public basis. He has requested a letter from Lord Dunnart, which he never received be sent to him in Los Angeles.

https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrit...atory-article/

[ACO]

There are two hearings tomorrow per court listings.

10am private (no media/public)
11am public (open for public to hear)

[Durham]

https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrit...atory-article/

"To say he has not been in touch with the Marines is not the case. He had many conversations with former colleagues during the lockdown and is in regular contact with a lot of military personnel on a private and personal basis."

Beyond confirming that he's been in touch (at least once presumably) with the RM's it doesn't actually say which colleagues or what type of military personnel he's been in contact with. So make of that what you will.

[Lori138]

ETA:
Chris Ship is tweeting that Meghan is requesting both a postponement and summary judgement.

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 2h
Meghan, Duchess of Sussex has requested a delay to the privacy case she is bringing against the Mail on Sunday. The full hearing was scheduled to begin at the High Court on January 11 2021. A judge will hear the arguments tomorrow.

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 2h
The requested delay is, in part, being laid at the Mail on Sunday's door, as it was the newspaper which applied and won an application to include the Finding Freedom biography in its defence. That has created more work for Meghan's lawyers as they pursue their privacy claim

Chris Ship@chrisshipitv 1h
Meghan's legal team is now applying for a "Summary Judgement" which would make the whole trial in January unnecessary. They say it's because they are so confident of their case in law and will argue tomorrow that the case should be determined on a "summary basis".[/QUOTE]

This doesn't make sense. On one hand they say the defence needs more time to prepare, on the other hand they say they have enough to win a judgement in the case without a trial. Which is it?

[ACO]

It seems to me that she just wants the Judge to give a verdict without a trial but in case it is denied... they also want it postponed? And that was the easiest reason to give?

Either way it is clear they trying to avoid returning in January.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Durham

https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrit...atory-article/

"To say he has not been in touch with the Marines is not the case. He had many conversations with former colleagues during the lockdown and is in regular contact with a lot of military personnel on a private and personal basis."

Beyond confirming that he's been in touch (at least once presumably) with the RM's it doesn't actually say which colleagues or what type of military personnel he's been in contact with. So make of that what you will.

What was the exact claim in the article? I guess it would be about Harry not showing interest in his regiment that he was honorary colonel of. Being personally in touch with former friends from the military is quite different from checking in with the 'royal marines'.

[Somebody]

How would a summary judgment work? I would think it could never be held against the defendant not being able to provide a full defense/argumentation, so anything unsolved would be deferred to the defendant; so a summary judgment would be higher risk for Meghan and her team? Would that be a correct summary?

[tommy100]

It seems to me - and I'm no legal expert - that they are trying to avoid it going to trial which Meghan's team are saying it 'because they are so confident of a win' but seems a bit suspicious after hearing the other side were willing to call Meghan, her father and the authors of Finding Freedom to testify in Court that Meghan's team now want a judge to decide to avoid that.

[poppy7]

Originally Posted by ACO

It seems to me that she just wants the Judge to give a verdict without a trial but in case it is denied... they also want it postponed? And that was the easiest reason to give?

Either way it is clear they trying to avoid returning in January.

Well it will be highly embarrassing for them. The other side will ripe them apart. Win or lose and it will make them look horrendous. I have no sympathy for them.

[HighGoalHighDreams]

The function of a trial is to determine contested facts. The law is then applied to the facts to determine an outcome. If X sequence of events in fact occurred as determined, the law considers this is "a breach of copyright" or whatever else, and the law prescribes such a range of penalties.

Summary judgment is when one or the other (and often both) parties essentially tells a judge: Look, even if everything the other party says is true, we still win this case. There is no need to have a trial (again, the purpose of which is to determine facts) because even if we agree everything Other Party is saying is true... we still win.

To plug that into Meghan's situation, Meghan is saying: Even if everything the DM says in their version of facts is 100% true, we would still win the case 100% of the time because no jury or judge could find differently according to the law.

A judge will then review the case, reading both side's version of facts and assuming for the moment that everything the DM has said is true. If it's the case that Meghan would win even if the DM's version of facts is 100% right, Meghan is entitled to summary judgment.

[poppy7]

Originally Posted by HighGoalHighDreams

The function of a trial is to determine contested facts. The law is then applied to the facts to determine an outcome. If X sequence of events in fact occurred as determined, the law considers this is "a breach of copyright" or whatever else, and the law prescribes such a range of penalties.

Summary judgment is when one or the other (and often both) parties essentially tells a judge: Look, even if everything the other party says is true, we still win this case. There is no need to have a trial (again, the purpose of which is to determine facts) because even if we agree everything Other Party is saying is true... we still win.

To plug that into Meghan's situation, Meghan is saying: Even if everything the DM says in their version of facts is 100% true, we would still win the case 100% of the time because no jury or judge could find differently according to the law.

A judge will then review the case, reading both side's version of facts and assuming for the moment that everything the DM has said is true. If it's the case that Meghan would win even if the DM's version of facts is 100% right, Meghan is entitled to summary judgment.

Majorly embarrassing though.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by poppy7

Well it will be highly embarrassing for them. The other side will ripe them apart. Win or lose and it will make them look horrendous. I have no sympathy for them.

I don't see how it is embarrassing. Sounds like they are fairly confident in the case and want it sped up. I also just learned Prince Charles did the same with his copyright case to.