News

Breaking: 'Strike out' judgment on Meghan Markle case against Mail on Sunday

01/05/2020

Hacked Off

Newspaper
✕ Press claim

✓ The truth

Reach
Up to
people misled
Help us fight back

Join 71,384 others who are taking action to share the truth & raise standards in the press

1. Share the truth
Post this rebuttal on social media
2. Fund the fightback
Help us challenge more stories like this
Donate
3. Tell your MP
Send a ready-written email in 30 seconds
Email your MP

Today’s judgment is in response to an application from lawyers acting for the Mail on Sunday (Associated Newspapers Ltd) to “strike out” (remove) four particulars of claim which support Ms Markle’s claim for misuse of private information. The particulars are “facts of the case” presented by Ms Markle’s team. The application was successful.

In total there are three claims being made by Ms Markle. The strike out action relates only to one of those claims, and at that, not the substantive claim but aggravation.

Hacked Off Policy Director Nathan Sparkes said,

“Today’s judgment makes no difference to Ms Markle’s substantial claim for misuse of private information, with the particulars struck out relating only to aggravation. The judge has been clear they may yet be relied upon, if a case can be made. Regardless, the other two claims remain wholly unaffected. “Harry and Meghan have been dragged through the mud by the Mail, which has waged a campaign of intrusion and abuse against Ms Markle in particular. While Harry and Meghan may be fortunate enough to afford legal action and professional representation, countless members of the public regularly face similar treatment without access to the same resources. Lives have been ruined by inaccurate and bullying reporting with little to no recourse for those affected.  “Until newspapers are independently regulated the press bullying and intimidation suffered by Harry, Meghan, and hundreds of members of the public every year will continue.”

ENDSFor press enquiries contact: sara@hackinginquiry.org 07554 665 940

NOTESHacked Off is the campaign for a free and accountable press, and we work with the victims of press abuse to achieve those aims.

Hacked Off is funded by supporters, not newspaper owners. Help us take this to Parliament: give £10 a month.

Give £10 a month

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News
When media abuse of academics becomes the norm in HE
Following the death of Jason Arday, Corinne Fowler writes on the toll of media abuse on academics and what universities must do to protect their staff.
8/19/26
News
IPSO ties itself in knots over Telegraph complaint
Media lawyer Jonathan Coad complained to IPSO about a Telegraph article claiming Hacked Off wants "state control" of the press. IPSO's response contradicted itself within the space of a few paragraphs.
8/14/26
News