INFORRM has an excellent two part post on Meghan Markle’s action for misuse of private information against the Associated Newspapers.
Seminal media law commentator Paul Wragg considers the defence advanced by Associated Newspapers and analyses the merits of its arguments in detail. Part I and Part II cover in-depth the elements of the defence, it’s fairly weak proponents and the general lack of supporting precedent.
The claim has three limbs in objecting in the papes use of excerpts of a pricate letter sent by Ms Markle to her father- misuse of private information, copyright infringement and data protection breaches.
The analysis right strikes the heart of the matter- the defence lacks merit and the arguments in Ms Markle’s favour are persuasive. The legitimate expectation of privacy she accrued in relation to the letter is a weighty consideration, one which Associated Newspapers looks to be struggling to fundamentally address given the couching of its defence.
This is to be expected- the arguments fall heavily in Markle’s favour and have basis in fundamental concepts of privacy enshrined in Article 8. It could be even called a textbook case of misuse of private information.