[ad_1]
Meghan Markle
Photo: Kristy Wigglesworth – Pool / Getty Images
- A judge ruled that Associated Newspapers will pay interim legal costs of R9.4 million to Meghan Markle following the victory of her high-profile court case.
- Last month, the Duchess, alleging a privacy violation, won her case against the newspaper group that published a private letter that she had sent to her father.
- Meghan’s attorney, Ian Mill, said she was not “seeking to punish the defendants,” but “to ensure that the defendant does not profit” from their conduct.
The UK newspaper group that published a letter written by Meghan Markle should pay interim legal costs following her high-profile privacy claim. victory last month, a judge ruled Tuesday.
Meghan scored a sweeping victory in February against Associated Newspapers after excerpts from the 2018 letter were published in 2019.
The letter to her father Thomas Markle, from whom she separated, was written a few months after she married Harry and asked him to stop talking to the tabloids and making false claims about her in interviews.
At a remote hearing in London High Court on Tuesday, Judge Mark Warby ordered Associated Newspapers to make a “provisional payment” of 450,000 pounds (9.4 million rand) to cover legal costs.
But the figure fell short of the £ 750,000 (R15.7 million) requested by Meghan’s lawyer, Ian Mill.
Following the ruling, attorneys for the editors of the weekly Mail On Sunday and the MailOnline website indicated they would appeal.
Warby himself said that he does not see “any real prospect” of the Court of Appeal reaching a different conclusion, but said the defendants have “the right to renew this request before a judge of the Court of Appeal.”
The former television actress’s legal team had asked for a front-page apology in the Mail On Sunday to publicize last month’s decision.
Warby made a “publication and broadcast order” but said it would be “more limited” than what had been requested.
He also said that he would not ask Associated Newspapers to provide him with any copies of the private letter it had at this stage.
More details should be outlined in a later written opinion.
Warby chose to postpone hearing the arguments until April or early May on damages that should be paid for misuse of private information, copyright infringement and data protection breaches.
Associated Newspapers attorney Adrian Speck argued that no “remedies or judgment” could be made on copyright before “copyright was determined.”
Questions about whether Jason Knauf, who at the time was serving as Kensington Palace’s communications director, was a co-author of the letter, have yet to be resolved.
Markle’s attorneys said they would be happy to accept nominal damages for misuse of private information in subsequent hearings if the court ordered the newspaper group to release its financial gains from copyright infringement.
Ian Mill said his client did not “seek to punish the defendants” but rather “intended to ensure that the defendant does not profit” from his conduct.
Meghan and Harry now live in the United States, after resigning from royal front-line duties last year because of what they said was intolerable media pressure.
Since then, they have taken legal action against various publications, alleging invasion of privacy.
A interview that the couple gave to an American chat show host, Oprah Winfrey, will air on Sunday.
