Related news
The Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle (40 years), will receive one pound sterling (1.19 euros) for “nominal damage“by the group Associated Newspapers (ANL), owner of the tabloid Mail on Sunday, after considering that this newspaper invaded privacy of the wife of prince harry (37).
According to the legal documents published this Wednesday, January 5 by local media, that group of media agreed to pay that amount for having done “misuse of private information“, in addition to having to compensate the Duchess with another sum – undisclosed – for infringe copyright.
Meghan took ANL to court over the publication of five articles reproducing parts of a handwritten letter “personal and private“that he had sent to his father, Thomas Markle, with whom she maintains a complicated relationship, in August 2018. The Duchess won the case last year when a London High Court judge ruled in his favor, without having previously held a full trial, and subsequently an Appeal Court rejected an appeal by Associated Newspapers.
Markle in a photograph taken in September 2021.
Gtres
–
–
A spokesperson for the Duchess has qualified the undisclosed sum for breaking the copyright What “substantial“, while making it clear that will be donated to charitable causes. Associated Newspapers agreed to pay that one pound figure as well as the “confidential sum” before next January 7. What’s more, Mail On Sunday must bear the legal costs of the Duchess, which could amount to 1 million pounds (1.2 million euros). Just a few days ago, Markle got a public apology by Mail on Sunday Y MailOnline, the media belonging to the group Associated Newspapers. In early December 2021, Meghan was winning the latest phase of your litigation against this major UK press group to protect your privacy. At that time, the London Court of Appeal rejected an appeal filed by Associated Newspapers Limited, which called for two previous rulings to be brought to trial, which were summarily resolved in a shorter process, as the judge found the evidence to be clear in Markle’s favor.
Justices Geoffrey Vos, Victoria Sharp and David Bean noted that “It is difficult to see what new evidence could have been provided in a trial that would have altered the situation,” and they considered the previous conclusions of the Superior Court “correct”. In a statement, the Duchess celebrated her triumph, in a unprecedented process for the British monarchy, who usually tries to avoid the courts.
“This is a victory not only for me, but for anyone who has been afraid to stand up for what is right “said Markle, who believes that the precedent will serve to combat the culture of the British tabloid press, conditioned “to be cruel and take advantage of the lies and pain” that it spreads. “Since the first day, I have treated this lawsuit as an important measure of what is right and what is wrong.. But they have treated it as a game without rules, “added Markle in the note, where he accused the opposing side of trying to twist and manipulate the process to generate more headlines.
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in a file image.
Gtres
–
–
“In the three years since this started, I have been patient in the face of deception, intimidation and calculated attacks. Today, the courts have ruled in my favor, once again, cementing that the Mail on Sunday, owned by Lord Jonathan Rothermere, has broken the law, “he added. In two summary opinions in February and May, the Superior concluded that the newspapers had violated the privacy of the Duchess by publishing in 2019 excerpts from the letter she addressed to her father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018, and that the letter was written by her and not by an assistant, which is why she is the injured party, as the owner of the intellectual right.
Markle, who now lives in the United States with her husband, Harry from England, and his two children, sued ANL for misuse of private information, violation of copyright (copyright) and infringement of data protection law. Associated Newspapers Limited argued during the process that the text – reproduced by its headlines, the most widely read in the country, in five articles in February 2019 – was actually part of an image strategy of the Duchess, and that it had also been written by a his assistant, so the rights belonged to the monarchy.
Judge Mark Warby said in February that, far from being in the general interest, the publication of the letter was “manifestly excessive, and therefore illegal”, since it was “a personal and private letter”, which addressed aspects of the bad relationship between the father and his daughter, who felt “anguished” by the behavior of his father.
[Más información: Meghan Markle, tras su triunfo por violar su privacidad: “Esto no es solo una victoria para mí”]
Follow the topics that interest you
– .
