Prince Harry's legal battle against the Mail on Sunday took a turn as he lost a bid to dismiss part of the publisher's defence in a libel case.
Despite his claims, the judge ruled in favor of ANL, stating that their defence based on honest opinion had a substantial chance of success and should proceed to trial.
This ruling coincides with another High Court challenge Prince Harry lodged against the Home Office regarding his security protection during visits to the UK. His legal team aims to reverse a decision that downgraded his security status following his cessation as a "working royal."
The core of the libel case revolves around an article alleging that Prince Harry attempted to mislead and confuse the public regarding his disagreement with the government over security matters.
The article suggested that the prince tried to conceal his legal tussle with the government concerning police bodyguards, only engaging in positive public relations after the story broke. Prince Harry refutes claims that he offered to finance his security only after initiating legal proceedings in 2021, contending that he made the offer in a prior Sandringham meeting.
Contrarily, the Mail on Sunday argues that the Sandringham offer was not directed at the government and insists that the prince extended the offer post-commencing his claim for a judicial review.
In the judge's recent ruling, Mr. Justice Nicklin stated that ANL had a genuine chance, during trial, to prove that Prince Harry had not made an offer to the government regarding security payment before initiating judicial proceedings.
The publisher's defence leans on the concept of honest opinion, shielding individuals or entities from defamation liability when expressing opinions rather than presenting false factual statements.
The case is set to proceed to trial in 2024. Photo by Mykola Swarnyk, Wikimedia commons.