Meghan Markle asks Mail on Sunday to pay $2.7 million in legal fees

Meghan Markle has demanded the publisher of Mail on Sunday pay her legal fees after a court deemed the paper breached her privacy.

Meghan Markle today demanded $2.7 million in legal fees and for the Mail on Sunday to hand over copies of the letter she wrote to her estranged dad after winning her privacy battle.

A High Court judge last month ruled the paper breached the Duchess of Sussex’s privacy when it printed extracts of a five-page letter she wrote to Thomas Markle.

And at a remote hearing on Tuesday, the Duchess’ lawyers asked the High Court to order Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) – the publisher of the Mail On Sunday and MailOnline – to hand over any copies of the letter to Mr Markle and destroy any electronic copies of it or any notes made about it.

The Duchess also said her legal costs were estimated to be $2.7 million – demanding 50 per cent of this to be paid within 14 days.

However, Lord Justice Warby ordered the Mail on Sunday to pay $800,000 in costs, with the possibility of more to be paid in the future.

RELATED: Hidden meaning in Meghan’s Oprah interview dress

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have filed several libel lawsuits. Picture: Phil Noble/Getty Images

Ian Mill QC, representing Meghan, told the court the Duchess was willing to “cap her damages” for misuse of private information “at a nominal award”, in order to “avoid the need for time and cost to be incurred in debating these issues”.

Meghan has also asked that the Mail on Sunday print a statement on their front page saying she had won her privacy case, while saying the Mail Online should have a piece on their website’s home page for six months.

Antony White QC, representing ANL, said printing a statement was unnecessary, adding it seemed to be “intended more as a species of punishment or retribution, rather than as a necessary and proportionate measure in the interests of the claimant or the public”.

Lord Justice Warby today refused to make any order for “delivery up or destruction” of any copies of Meghan’s letter to her father “at this stage”.

He also said he would also make a “limited order” for the judgment to be shared but that it would be much more restricted than Meghan’s request.

The judge said the details of the order for publication and his reasons for granting it would be provided in a written ruling, to be handed down at a later date.

The Mail on Sunday’s application to appeal the privacy and copyright decision was today refused.

They will however be able to apply to the Court of Appeal.

RELATED: Piers Morgan rips into Meghan and Harry over Oprah interview

It’s been a busy month for Harry and Meghan, pictured here in their upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey. Picture: CBS

Last month, the judge ruled the publication of Meghan’s letter to her father was “manifestly excessive and hence unlawful”.

In a ruling in February, Mr Justice Warby granted Meghan summary judgment in relation to her privacy claim, meaning she won that claim without having to go to trial – and that she would not have to face her dad Thomas in court.

The 39-year-old royal had claimed articles published in February 2019 involved a misuse of her private information, breached her copyright and breached the Data Protection Act.

And the judge also granted Meghan’s copy claim, saying the Mail On Sunday’s articles “copied a large and important proportion of the work’s original literary content”.

He said: “It was, in short, a personal and private letter.

“The majority of what was published was about the claimant’s own behaviour, her feelings of anguish about her father’s behaviour, as she saw it, and the resulting rift between them.

“These are inherently private and personal matters.”

RELATED: Meghan’s outfit detail hints at baby gender

The pair announced last month that they would not be returning as senior members of the royal family. Picture: Simon Dawson/AFP

However, the judge said the issue of whether Meghan was “the sole author” – or whether Jason Knauf, formerly communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, was a “co-author” – should be determined at a trial, despite being one “of minor significance in the overall context”.

Meghan’s data protection claim was not considered at the summary judgment hearing earlier this year and is still outstanding.

Releasing a statement last month, the Duchess said: “For today, with this comprehensive win on both privacy and copyright, we have all won.”

A spokesperson for ANL said they were “very surprised” by the ruling.

This article originally appeared on The Sun and was reproduced with permission