Prince Harry Takes Legal Stand Against Mail on Sunday in Libel Case

In a bold move, Prince Harry is gearing up to take his libel case against the Mail on Sunday to the High Court, seeking a ruling in his favor without the need for a trial.

This decision comes as he looks to mirror the legal triumph his wife, Meghan Markle, achieved against the same newspaper last year.

The Duke of Sussex plans to apply for a summary judgment at an upcoming hearing, likely scheduled within the next two months.

This follows unsuccessful attempts by both parties to settle the matter outside of court.

Harry's lawsuit targets Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over an article published in February, which alleged that he had tried to keep aspects of his legal battle with the Home Office regarding his security under wraps.

The contentious article suggested that when news of Harry's legal dispute was first made public, his PR team claimed he had offered to pay for police protection, only to have that offer rejected.

Harry contends that the publication twisted the narrative, implying he had lied and manipulated the situation to sway public opinion in his favor.

This isn't the first time the Mail on Sunday has found itself in hot water with the Sussexes.

In February 2021, Meghan successfully sued the same newspaper group after they published excerpts from a private letter she wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.

The High Court ultimately ruled in her favor, granting her a summary judgment that she celebrated as a significant victory against unlawful and degrading practices.

Harry's legal team argues that he had indeed offered to fund security for himself and his family during their visits to the UK.

They claim this agreement was reached during the Sandringham Summit in January 2020, which included discussions with the late Queen and King Charles.

Furthermore, they assert that this offer was reiterated in a meeting with Sir Mark Sedwill, who was then the Cabinet Secretary and UK Home Security Advisor.

On the flip side, ANL is contesting Harry's claims, asserting that no such offer was communicated to the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVC).

They plan to defend themselves using the Honest Opinion defense, arguing that the article did not cause significant harm to Harry's reputation.

During the initial phase of the case in July, Mr. Justice Nicklin ruled in favor of the Duke, stating that parts of the article were indeed defamatory, insinuating that Harry's actions were disreputable and that he intended to mislead the public.

However, the judge dismissed the notion that the article directly accused Harry of lying, emphasizing that the average reader would discern the difference between manipulating facts and outright deceit.

As this legal saga unfolds, public opinion remains divided.

Many are left wondering whether Prince Harry's actions are justified or if the Mail on Sunday has a right to reveal what they consider the truth.

The comments section is alive with speculation and debate about the Duke's motives and the implications of the case.

For now, all eyes are on the forthcoming hearing, where the court will determine whether Harry's case will proceed to trial or if he will secure a decisive victory without one.

The stakes are high, not just for Harry but for the media landscape and the privacy rights of public figures.

As we await developments, the conversation continues.

What do you think?

Is Prince Harry in the right, or does the Mail have a valid point in its reporting?

The outcome of this case could set significant precedents for how similar disputes are handled in the future.