[ad_1]
A legal battle between the Dukes of Sussex and the day The Mail on Sunday It does not come to give shape to those who love it. The first hearing was considered irrelevant to Juiz Grande hair, part of the argument presented by Meghan and Harry, since, according to your opinion, it did not apply to what was to be judged: to publication, by The Mail on Sunday, from a letter that Meghan sent to the country, Thomas Markle, in August 2018.
O safeguard court, porém, that
or process could be reviewed case on legal basis fosse altered.
“I do not consider that the allegations presented on the basis of Estejam are not the case, that, in essence, I respect the publication of five authors who disclose the words and information extracted from the written letter of the request to their country in August 2018. Some aspects of In the event that a complaint can be reviewed in this phase, it is forem affirmed or juiz.
Secondly, the representatives bequeath two dukes, or Judge Warby did not consider the allegations that the publication was “Dishonestly”, ao deixar de fora certas passagens gives letter. Or juiz também não consideredou or argument that the editor tinha “deliberately” raised questões between Meghan and her country, and that there was a “diary” to publish intrusive or offensive stories about the Duchess. Justice Warby stated that these allegations are not due to be part of the process in this stage, because they were “Irrelevant”For reinvestment for the improper use of private information, violation of the author’s directives and violation of Law of Protection of Data.
A voice-over of the Duchess of Sussex stated on a decision that “The main elements of this case are not moving and will continue to move forward. I direct you duchess foram violated. As part of this process, as the Mail On Sunday, we used distorted, manipulative and dishonest tactics to attack the Duchess of Sussex, exposed foram ”. And he continued: “Embora or Juiz acknowledges that they have made a claim for violation of the privacy of the authors, we are surprised to see that their decision suggests that their dishonest behavior is not relevant. We feel that honesty and integrity is not important. In the meantime, we respect the decision of the judge, pois or forte argument against the Associated Press will continue to be a matter of a private letter, intimate and written à mão, de uma filha ao seu pai, ter published by The Mail On Sunday. That serious violation of the directive of any person is deprived of the obvious and illegal, and The Mail on Sunday should be held responsible for his years. “
