The Duke of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Limited

The Duke of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Limited

The Article's natural and ordinary meaning is that the Claimant initially sought unjustifiably wide confidentiality restrictions in his legal claim, was responsible for public statements misleading the public about his willingness to pay for police protection, and attempted to mislead and confuse the public, which is defamatory at common law. The meanings found are partly fact and partly opinion. The Article does not allege the Claimant lied, but does allege misleading conduct amounting to defamation.

Parties
Claimant: The Duke of Sussex; Defendant: Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Libel / Preliminary Issues Determination
Outcome
Preliminary issues determined in favour of the Claimant; Article found to bear defamatory meanings at common law.
Legal Topics
Libel, Meaning of Defamatory Statements, Fact Vs Opinion, Threshold of Seriousness, Preliminary Issues
Defamation Media Law Libel Meaning of Defamatory Statements Fact Vs Opinion Threshold of Seriousness Preliminary Issues

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Duke of Sussex

Claimant

Associated Newspapers Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Libel / Preliminary Issues Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the natural and ordinary meaning of the Article?
  2. 2 Does the Article contain statements of fact or expressions of opinion?
  3. 3 Are the meanings found defamatory of the Claimant at common law?

Ratio Decidendi

The Article's natural and ordinary meaning is that the Claimant initially sought unjustifiably wide confidentiality restrictions in his legal claim, was responsible for public statements misleading the public about his willingness to pay for police protection, and attempted to mislead and confuse the public, which is defamatory at common law. The meanings found are partly fact and partly opinion. The Article does not allege the Claimant lied, but does allege misleading conduct amounting to defamation.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined in favour of the Claimant; Article found to bear defamatory meanings at common law.

Orders

  • Defendant to file Defence; further proceedings to determine serious harm and any substantive defences.