Ajit Karn
Prince Harry’s attorneys told a London court on Friday that Associated Newspapers had no plausible defence to his libel claim over an article about his security arrangements, as the British royal seeks to win his case out of court.
Last year, Harry, the younger son of King Charles, sued Associated Newspapers over an article in its Mail on Sunday newspaper that claimed he had only offered to pay for police protection after initiating a separate legal action against the British government.
The article stated that Harry, 38, attempted to conceal details of his legal battle with the government over his publicly-funded protection, which was revoked after he stepped down from royal duties in 2020, and that his advisers attempted to portray it positively.
In July, London’s High Court ruled that the Mail article accusing Harry of trying to mislead the public was defamatory, paving the way for Harry to pursue his case against one of Britain’s largest media publishers.
Friday, Harry’s attorneys informed Judge Matthew Nicklin that Harry had offered to pay for police protection at a January 2020 crisis meeting with the late Queen Elizabeth, his father, and brother Prince William at the royal Sandringham estate.
Justin Rushbrooke asserted that Associated Newspapers lacked a factual foundation for its defence and asked the court to render a summary judgement in Harry’s benefit without a trial.
Associated Newspapers’ attorneys stated, however, that they would rely on a strong argument of “honest opinion” and that Harry’s attempt to win the case without a trial was “entirely without merit.”
The publisher’s attorney, Andrew Caldecott, also argued in court documents that the article had not caused Harry’s reputation significant damage, as required by English libel law.
Meghan Markle, the American wife of Prince Harry, gained a summary judgement in her privacy case against the Mail on Sunday two years ago for the publication of portions of a handwritten letter she had sent to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
The couple cited media intrusion as one of the reasons for standing back from royal duties and relocating to California to establish new lives and careers.
In his memoir “Spare” and the couple’s six-part Netflix documentary series, Harry focused extensively on the conduct of the media, and he has engaged in a series of legal disputes with the tabloid press.
Also read: “I’m Back,” writes Trump’s first posts on Facebook and YouTube after the ban was lifted
A hearing is scheduled for later this month in another case he has brought against Associated Newspapers alongside vocalist Elton John and others, which will attempt to dismiss allegations of phone-tapping and other privacy violations.
In May, his lawsuit against the Daily Mirror newspaper for phone-hacking allegations will go to trial, and Harry will likely testify.
Also for alleged phone-hacking, he is suing News Group Newspapers, the publisher of the now-defunct News of the World and The Sun.
