What IS IT with royal consorts and lawsuits? You would think they would be aware that they will be covered and talked about.
The issue is copyrigght of her letters not being covered.
What IS IT with royal consorts and lawsuits? You would think they would be aware that they will be covered and talked about.
I believe the problem for Harry and Meghan is that they have no understanding of how the media works in the UK. Meghan especially needed an intensive course by a palace media consultant to explain the lay of the land so to speak while she was engaged.
I am sure Meghan felt she understood how the media works but the UK lot are a different beast.
I look at the DM headlines and can usually tell if it is a made up story. What I am interested in is reading the comments from people all over the world.
I don't blame the couple for being upset by the untruths written about them. However, they have to come to terms with the reality that articles written about them garners comments in the thousands. Their little nonsense stories written about them receives huge interest from people everywhere who just want to comment and some vent their frustrations. It doesn't happen much at all with other DM stories.
So click bait is the name of this little game and H & M should have been taught / lectured / had it drummed into them on how to deal with it.
Wasting money on the court system is just wasting money. The thing is they would still remain in the media spotlight without taking the media to court.
We seem to be having a discussion we've had many times in the past - we are way past the issues concerning how the media should have been handled. In any event, this thread is to discuss the Court Case itself so lets' move on back to that topic.
So AP trying to amend their claim the Sussexes were cooperating with Omid and Durand.
Latest ruling issued today.
Edit:
AP can use the book as ruled.
The articles I am seeing state that Meghan is requesting a postponement.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...e-bids-postpone-High-Court-privacy-trial.html
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-mail-on-sunday-delay-royal-news-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".
https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a34504251/prince-harry-legal-warning-false-defamatory-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.
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.
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.
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.