जीवन
VIP Memeber
- Posts
- 282
- Posts Power
- 282.0%
- Liked
- 1
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2023
A judge has ruled that Prince Harry's libel claim against the Mail on Sunday must go to trial.
The 39-year-old royal is suing the newspaper's publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), over an article written in February 2022 about his legal battle with the Home Office over a decision to downgrade his protective security during U.K. visits.
In the article, the reporter claimed that the Duke of Sussex tried to keep details of the legal challenge secret to "mislead and confuse the public".
Harry's lawyers called the allegation "an attack on his honesty and integrity", while ANL's legal team insisted it was simply an "honest opinion" that did not cause "serious harm" to the royal's reputation.
In his written judgment on Friday, Mr Justice Nicklin of London's High Court ruled that the publisher had a "real prospect" of arguing its case at trial.
"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 ruling reads.
In a summary, he wrote, "The Duke of Sussex's claim will now go through its remaining pre-trial phases and, unless resolved in some other way, to a trial at some point in 2024."
The ruling comes a day after a hearing into Harry's security arrangements concluded in London's High Court. He is challenging the decision to downgrade his security protection in the U.K. after he stopped being a working royal in 2020.
His lawyers called the decision "unlawful and unfair" and argued that he had been treated "less favourably" than other members of the British royal family.
A judgment in that case, which was heard by a different judge, is expected at a later date.
The 39-year-old royal is suing the newspaper's publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), over an article written in February 2022 about his legal battle with the Home Office over a decision to downgrade his protective security during U.K. visits.
In the article, the reporter claimed that the Duke of Sussex tried to keep details of the legal challenge secret to "mislead and confuse the public".
Harry's lawyers called the allegation "an attack on his honesty and integrity", while ANL's legal team insisted it was simply an "honest opinion" that did not cause "serious harm" to the royal's reputation.
In his written judgment on Friday, Mr Justice Nicklin of London's High Court ruled that the publisher had a "real prospect" of arguing its case at trial.
"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 ruling reads.
In a summary, he wrote, "The Duke of Sussex's claim will now go through its remaining pre-trial phases and, unless resolved in some other way, to a trial at some point in 2024."
The ruling comes a day after a hearing into Harry's security arrangements concluded in London's High Court. He is challenging the decision to downgrade his security protection in the U.K. after he stopped being a working royal in 2020.
His lawyers called the decision "unlawful and unfair" and argued that he had been treated "less favourably" than other members of the British royal family.
A judgment in that case, which was heard by a different judge, is expected at a later date.