Meghan Markle wins court battle to keep friends' identities secret

Duchess of Sussex suing Associated Newspapers over article that reproduced ‘private and confidential’ letter she sent to estranged father

The Duchess of Sussex has won a High Court bid to keep secret the identities of five friends who gave an anonymous interview to a US magazine, in the latest stage of her legal action against a British newspaper.

Mr Justice Warby ruled on Wednesday that “for the time being at least” Meghan should be granted an order to ensure the names of her friends, who defended her in a February 2019 article in People magazine, are not released publicly.

The duchess said her friends gave the interview without her knowledge and denies claims made by Associated Newspapers (ANL) that she “caused or permitted” the article, which criticised the bullying the royal has faced, to be published.

Following the ruling, a spokesperson for Meghan said she had the interests of her friends at heart.

“The duchess felt it was necessary to take this step to try to protect her friends – as any of us would – and we’re glad this was clear,” the spokesperson said.

“We are happy that the judge has agreed to protect these five individuals.”

Meghan, 39, is suing ANL, the publisher of The Mail On Sunday and MailOnline, over articles that reproduced parts of a “private and confidential” handwritten letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas Markle, 76, in August 2018.

Justin Rushbrooke QC, representing the duchess, said ANL had made the People interviews relevant to the case and had “forced” the duchess to identify the names of the five friends in a court document.

In written submissions to the court, he said: “To force the claimant, as the defendant urges this court to do, to disclose their identities to the public at this stage would be to exact an unacceptably high price for pursuing her claim for invasion of privacy against the defendant in respect of its disclosure of the letter.

”On her case, which will be tried in due course, the defendant has been guilty of a flagrant and unjustified intrusion into her private and family life.

“Given the close factual nexus between the letter and the events leading up to the defendant’s decision to publish its contents, it would be a cruel irony were she required to pay that price before her claim has even been determined.”

In written submissions, Antony White QC, acting for ANL, said the friends are “important potential witnesses on a key issue”.

He said: “Reporting these matters without referring to names would be a heavy curtailment of the media’s and the defendant’s entitlement to report this case and the public’s right to know about it.”

Legal experts have described Wednesday’s ruling as “disappointing”.

Matthew Dando, a partner at law firm Wiggin LLP, said the decision “prefers secrecy over openness and creates a concerning precedent”.

He added: “That she [Meghan] has prevented Associated Newspapers from revealing the identities of those friends undermines the principle of open justice, hinders its ability to report on the case and the ability of the public to follow it.”

ANL won the first battle in the legal action on 1 May, when Mr Justice Warby struck out parts of Meghan’s claim, including allegations that the publisher acted “dishonestly” by leaving out certain passages of the letter.

Court papers show Meghan has agreed to pay ANL’s £67,888 costs for that hearing in full.

ANL denies allegations that it misused private information, infringed copyright and breached the Data Protection Act and is fiercely contesting the case.

Additional reporting by Press Association