Meghan, 39, the wife of Queen Elizabeth's grandson Prince Harry,
is suing Associated Newspapers after its Mail on Sunday printed
extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her estranged
father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018.
She is seeking aggravated damages, saying the publication of the
letter was a misuse of private information and breached her
copyright.
The paper has said the duchess was willing for other private
matters to become public if it suited her interests, and it was
justified in publishing parts of the letter in response to
interviews her anonymous friends had given to the U.S. magazine
People, and because of her royal status.
At the start of a two-day hearing at London's High Court,
Meghan's lawyer, Justin Rushbrooke, said judge Mark Warby should
give a summary judgment in favour of the former U.S. actress as
the paper's arguments had "no reasonable grounds" of success and
did not stand up to scrutiny.
He said the Mail on Sunday had broken the code of conduct that
British newspapers worked by, and the case raised "a disturbing
question" about who controlled the contents of a private letter.
"Is it the writer of the letter or the editor of the Mail on
Sunday?" Rushbrooke said.
"There can only be one answer to that question and the answer
would be the same irrespective of whether the write was a
duchess or any other citizen. And the answer is it is not the
editor of the Mail on Sunday."
He said the decision to publish the letter was an assault on
"her private life, her family life and her correspondence". In
documents submitted to the court, her legal team described the
paper's defence as "a case of smoke and mirrors".
In its written argument submitted to the court, the Mail on
Sunday said Meghan had expected the letter's contents to become
public, and, even if she had a privacy right, it was outweighed
by the paper's freedom of expression rights.
"This case is wholly unsuitable for summary judgment. There is
uncertainty as to a number of significant factual matters which
can, and should, be investigated at trial when the court will
have the full picture in terms of disclosure and evidence," the
paper's legal team said.
The trial was due to start last week but was delayed until late
2021 because of a "confidential" reason.
(Reporting by Michael Holden; Editing by William James and Alex
Richardson)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
|
|