In February 2022, Prince Harry sued ANL, the banner corporation for the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday. The Mail had, at the time, run several exclusive stories which were particularly nasty about Harry’s need for security when he visited the UK, and his offer to pay back the security. Harry has always maintained that he offered to pay back the cost of his royal protection in 2020, during the Sandringham Summit. Later on, he claimed that QEII’s private secretary Edward Young did not present his offer to “pay back” the security costs to Ravec. Which led to the Mail calling Harry a liar who never offered to pay back the costs. So, that lawsuit against ANL has been working its way through the courts. Harry wanted a summary judgment, which basically would have been the judge saying that the Mail has no defense and the Mail needs to settle with Harry out of court. That didn’t happen – the lawsuit will now go to trial next year.
Prince Harry may be called to give evidence in London court next year after losing an attempt to have the Mail on Sunday’s defense of his libel lawsuit thrown out.
On Friday, Justice Matthew Nicklin said in his judgment that the Duke of Sussex’s lawsuit against Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) over a 2022 article alleging that he only offered to pay for police protection after bringing a separate legal fight against the British government should proceed to trial. ANL is the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday.
Prince Harry, 39, tried to have ANL’s defense dismissed earlier this year. In March, his legal team argued that Harry had initially offered to pay for police protection at a meeting at Sandringham with his grandmother Queen Elizabeth, his father King Charles and elder brother Prince William in January 2020. The much-discussed meeting, since dubbed “the Sandringham Summit,” brought the family members together to discuss what Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s future might look like after they announced their intention to step back from their senior royal roles.
In March, the Associated Press reported that would have been “a ruling in the prince’s favor without going to trial” if the High Court decided to toss ANL’s defense or deliver a summary judgment. However, Justice Nicklin said on Friday that it should be heard in court.
“The Defendant [ANL] has a real prospect, at trial, of demonstrating that the Duke of Sussex had not made an offer to the Government to pay for his security before he began his proceedings for judicial review,” the British High Court judge announced, per the BBC.
According to the outlet, the Mail on Sunday is arguing that Prince Harry did not extend the offer to the government after the Sandringham meeting and only pitched the idea after initiating the claim for a judicial review. Reuters recapped that the report accused the prince of “attempting to mislead the public about his willingness to pay for the policing,” noting that the protection was pulled after the step back in 2020.
Looking ahead, the BBC said that ANL can use the honest opinion defense, which protects individuals or organizations from being held liable for defamation in litigation where statements are made as opinions, not false statements of fact, and a trial is now expected to be held in 2024.
[From People]
The thing about the Mail’s initial reporting – the reporting for which Harry is suing – is that it wasn’t “honest opinion.” It was clear that someone in the palace briefed against Harry and the Mail published the smear job without question. This keeps happening too, even though Harry can’t sue every paper every time it happens. This particular palace smear job was particularly nasty though, because it went to the heart of Harry’s need for security, which QEII put on record too.
Meanwhile, the judge has just ordered Harry to pay nearly £50,000 to ANL after the summary judgment was rejected.
📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube pic.twitter.com/5GVBKQJAAx
— Sky News (@SkyNews) December 11, 2023
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.
Source: Read Full Article