Prince Harry and Meghan 'will spoil' jubilee says Levin
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info
The Duke of Sussex, 37, is currently suing the publishers of the Mail on Sunday after a report was publishing claiming he was “tried to keep his legal fight with the government over police bodyguards a secret”. Harry claims the newspaper report undermined his charity work and caused “serious harm” to his reputation.
The Duke is claiming “damages including aggravated damages” for libel.
The story published by the tabloid detailed another of Harry’s court cases, as the Duke is currently locked in an ongoing battle with the British government over police security.
Harry has appealed a decision made by the Home Office to deny him the opportunity to pay for police protection for him and his family when they are in the UK.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have previously taken the tabloids to court.
The current defamation trial launched by Harry marks the Sussexes’ eighth litigation filed since September 2019.
At that time, the couple were simultaneously suing three of the country’s biggest newspaper groups.
Amber Melville-Brown, global head of reputation at international law firm Withers, told Newsweek claims the couple could be locked in a “life-long battle” of lawsuits after abandoning the Royal Family’s traditional “never complain, never explain” mantra.
The saying is said to have first been adopted by the Queen Mother when she became Queen Consort in 1936, before being passed on to her own daughter — the current Queen Elizabeth II.
The term, in a nutshell, explains the Firm’s approach to public relations, as the Royal Family traditionally does not wade in on the press frenzy around certain royal scandals.
Instead, the monarchy traditionally stands back and lets the drama run its course.
Amber Melville-Brown claims if the Duke and Duchess of Sussex continue to bring lawsuits against the press the pair will “find themselves very busy”.
She told Newsweek: “Meghan and Harry are engaged in what will inevitably be a life-long battle with the British tabloids; they will not be strangers to scrutiny, criticism and at times serious accusations; and if they complain, explain and bring suit each time scrutiny and serious accusations are sent their way, they will find themselves very busy.”
As an antithesis to the Sussexes, she notes that the monarchy’s policy has made it “unequivocally clear” that “no explanation or engagement will be forthcoming”.
Prince William and Kate whiz to Manchester for poignant event [LATEST]
William sparks frenzy with ‘powerful picture’ of monarchy’s future [PICTURES]
Queen ‘not putting her feet up’ as she ‘maintains busy diary’ [REPORT]
She claims that in their decision to part from this, Meghan and Harry have put themselves in a position where they feel as though they have to “explain” themselves.
She said: “For the Royal Family, the beauty of the ‘never complain, never explain’ philosophy is consistency.
“It’s a mantra for all seasons, a response for all eventualities, making unequivocally clear in the face of damaging accusations, gossip or rumour that no explanation or engagement will be forthcoming.
“By departing from that strategy Prince Harry has put himself in the position where he has to, or at least feels he has to complain about accusations and explain himself, where otherwise silence and a shrug of the regal shoulders would have been offered.”
Last year, Meghan sued the same British tabloid currently locked in a legal battle with her husband.
The Duchess won the lawsuit against Associate Newspaper for violating her privacy after they published a letter she had written to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
In January it was announced that Meghan would receive £1 in damages.
This nominal sum was set out in court documents which formally confirmed the newspaper had accepted defeat.
The BBC reported that the group would also pay an unspecified sum for a separate case of infringing her copyright.
Source: Read Full Article