How much will Duchess Meghan be awarded in damages from her legal victory?

Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, attend a roundtable discussion on gender equality!

I’m still aglow with the Duchess of Sussex’s legal victory! She didn’t even have to take this stupid issue to trial, although it looked dicey there for a while. Justice Warby issued his summary judgment that yes, of course Meghan’s letter to her father was private and of course the Mail had no business publishing it and wildly misrepresenting the letter and Meghan’s motives. The trial set for March will only be slightly about who owns the copyright (Meghan solely or Meghan and Jason Knauf) and mostly about DAMAGES.

I really don’t know what kind of comparison to make to judge what kind of damages could be made here. The British system of damages feels very different than the American system. The Telegraph says that the court will award damages for different things, and they think Meghan could get £300,000 for the breach of privacy, but she could get millions for copyright infringement, because she’s entitled to the profits made by the newspapers for wrongly publishing her letter. Plus legal fees. So, first the lawyers will get paid, and then Meghan said she would donate the rest.

Meanwhile, the British press is doing a lot of whining about how this case might set a new precedent which could “puts manacles on the media” and keep them from publishing “leaked” materials. The thing about that is… there have been cases where media outlets published private letters, gotten sued for it, and lost. There already are precedents on the books. And those previous cases actually did involve matters of state, whereas Meghan’s case involved her telling off her toxic father for being a douche, and then the toxic father GETTING PAID to smear her.

Meghan Markle meets local school children during a walkabout with Britain's Prince Harry during a visit to Birmingham

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

49 Responses to “How much will Duchess Meghan be awarded in damages from her legal victory?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. JT says:

    I hope the damages are so significant, that these rats will think twice the next time they want to pull this sh*t with Meghan again. Losing money is the only way to truly punish the likes of the DM and they deserve to hurt over it, especially with all of the shenanigans they’ve pulled with this case.

  2. Seraphina says:

    The hell that woman has been through is crazy. The psychological trauma they have caused from day one and continue to do so is beyond comprehension. I am glad she won and this is one case, were is she kept the money, good on her. And I will say this again, and it’s been said by others here before, what kind of low life scum bag calls himself a father and does THIS to his daughter???

    • My Two Cents says:

      Absolutely, it’s even more amazing how calm and centered she has remained through it all, she really is super woman! I personally would like to see the paper trail to Thomas for work in smearing her – THAT would really make my day if he were to come forward to say the palace, Will gave him money to smear his own daughter! I mean, he’s got nothing to lose now, any hope of a relationship with Meghan or Archie is gone… he’s a desperate man and desperate people do desperate things.

  3. Sa says:

    They’re worried this might put manacles on them and stop them from publishing things it’s illegal for them to publish?

    • Julie says:

      Someone should dig up theses journalists text messages and emails to their parents and publish. Let’s see how quickly they learn a little decency.

    • mynameispearl says:

      Well I suppose things like the Panama papers and stuff could be illegal to print, difference is though that that stuff could be argued as being in the public interest. Loads of things that investigative journalists publish, or that whistleblowers submit could be actually illegal, but we need to know. I dont think that this will affect that though.

      Meghan’s letter to her dad was never in the public interest (the public being interested in gossip does not count lol).

      If her dad had given a rebuttal and just described the letter, and the mail could confirm they had read it and agree with her dads assessment of the letter that would have been no issue, they chose not to do that so that’s on them.

      The Mails owners have a lot of money though, so the money probably wont hurt them as much as a smaller publication.

      • Becks1 says:

        @mynameispearl that was my thought as well – part of the Mail’s defense here was that there was a public interest exception to publishing this letter, and the judge said “nah.” It doesnt mean that there will never be a public interest exception again for publishing private correspondence. The press is going to be just fine in the long run in terms of being able to publish things that are actually relevant.

      • Harper says:

        While reading the judgment, it occurred to me that if there was correspondence between a certain Prince and a certain neighbor that confirmed a relationship, the Fail might have a legal leg to stand on for publishing it. In Meghan’s ruling, the judge wrote that, depending on the case, there is some protection for publishing private correspondence when the correspondence reveals that the public has been lied to. I immediately thought that if they had proof that someone was a-straying, they could risk publishing because they’d have a shot at winning the inevitable suit, claiming that his happy family image was a lie.

    • Hell Nah! says:

      *comment deleted*

  4. notasugarhere says:

    I don’t remember if Charles received payment. He did win his summary judgement that his copyright was infringed. They appealed and lost, and they were not allowed to publish any more excerpts.

  5. Sue says:

    There is so much I don’t understand: how could M’s father ever think it would explain his side if the letter reveals so many unfavorable details about him?
    And: how can they still publish the letter on their websites?

    • lanne says:

      Thomas is a classic narcissist—he texts every box for NPD. He’s not operating on logic or reason. Just his feelings in the moment. Meghan made him mad so she must pay. It doesn’t go any deeper than that. For him, it’s ME ME ME.

    • HeatherC says:

      He seems to think the letter was “hurtful” and the entire letter would put Meghan in a “bad light” because she never wrote “I am so so so sorry Daddy, please forgive me and come to palace, I’ll set you up for life because you’re the best daddy in the world. Everything Harry and I have is yours, you deserve no less.”

      He already claimed she never wrote she loved him and the court slapped that down as well.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Why assume he had an understandable ‘reason’ for repeatedly hurting his child in this way? My bet is money changed hands, just as it did with the KP staffer boyfriend who was caught getting paid for info about Harry and Meghan.

  6. sarah says:

    The difference between UK and US is that UK has no “penal damages” – that is damages that are supposed to punish you for the unlawful act. The UK only has “compensatory damages” – that is damages that compensate you for your actual loss but that could be quantified if your loss is non-monetary (such as a loss of privacy). Although I don’t know the precedent for privacy claims, for defamation claims those damages are capped at around £250k for the worst type of defamatory slurs (eg someone is a accused of murder or worse).
    I imagine it will settle now – unless Associated thinks it can get more content from a damages trial.

    • anotherlily says:

      AFAIK there are three elements in the damages assessment for a case like this.

      Costs of pursuing the claim and any other financial loss arising from the case.
      Additional damages based on factors such as ‘the flagrancy of the infringement’ and the extent to which the defendant has benefited.
      Aggravated damages based on factors such as humiliation, distress, insult or pain caused by the defendant’s conduct.

  7. UnionSnack says:

    The best reward is explosed butts of haters and royal reporters. It’s blazing like the thousands of sunsets.

  8. BayTampaBay says:

    @UK and British CB Barristers and Solicitors – Will Meghan be allowed to disclose the amount of the damages?

    • Sofia says:

      Not a lawyer but I suppose the Fail will want to keep the amount of damages confidential so they could strike a deal with Meghan and say we will give you a little more money but please stay quiet about how much we gave you.

    • sarah says:

      Completely depends on how those damages are decided. If they settle, whether or not you can disclose depends on the terms of the settlement (most often it is agreed that damages are confidential though the parties normally agree to press release wording such “settled on the payment of substantial/significant damages”). If it goes to trial, the damages will be public record.

      • LaraW” says:

        Does the UK have treble damages, or would the added amount be considered penal?

      • Nic919 says:

        I highly doubt damages would ever be made public if there is a settlement. Also the media can speculate wildly if it’s kept quiet.

    • UnionSnack says:

      Even if she couldn’t disclose the amount it’s always a heartwarming welcome for the insiders.

  9. souperkay says:

    I don’t like the idea that damages have to be donated. They are given because they have been earned. Megan should be free to take her damages and spend it all on herself or pull out the cash and light it on fire if she wants. That money is hers and no one else’s.

    • WhoElse says:

      It seems like she’s choosing to do that, as opposed to being compelled, which is fine. She doesn’t exactly need the money, and was doing this more out of principle, so if some needy person or people get something out of it as well, that’s even better.

    • Amy Too says:

      It doesn’t have to be donated, she could keep it if she wanted. Or are you saying you don’t like that she and Harry feel like they shouldn’t keep it?

      I think Meghan might not care so much about the money, she cares about winning this case, proving that she was right and they were wrong, and setting the precedent for herself and others. She doesn’t probably need or want the money and since this isn’t money she set out to make professionally through work as payment for a service she rendered, maybe she feels like she should donate it rather than keep it?

    • CC2 says:

      I believe she has already said she would give the money to a charity. So if she keeps it all, people would give her the side-eye. I think she would use it for Archewell, I believe she is partnering with an organisation for mental health.

    • minx says:

      It’s certainly her money but I just don’t see her keeping it. She and Harry are quite comfortable and it makes a statement to give it to a charity of their choice.

  10. Sofia says:

    If she donates it all, she’s a much better person than me. I would keep whatever I get if I were her.

    But I’m not her so if donating is the way she wants to go, then that’s what she’ll do.

    • LaraW” says:

      People approach settlements and the money associated differently. I accepted a settlement and while I was completely in the right, taking the money felt, at the time, like I was somehow betraying myself. I didn’t do it for money. I pursued legal action because I wanted the other party to be held accountable and because I wouldn’t have been able to live with myself if I had let it go. I really didn’t consider damages until my attorney brought it up, saying it would be easy to get the sum because it was such an open and such matter.

      There are some things— especially when they are extremely personal, psychologically damaging, and emotionally painful— that no amount of money can truly compensate. Taking the money felt like I had somehow implicitly agreed my experience and the deep pain it caused in my life was only worth a certain dollar amount. I don’t blame her for deciding to donate the money. I haven’t been able to use mine. It just… sits in my portfolio and grows and while I’ve gotten used to having it and understand I didn’t betray myself, I still associate it with the events that led to how I got it in the first place.

  11. Rosa D says:

    I’d love an inquiry into the tabloid practice of “monstering” where the press deliberately run negative stories with the purpose of whipping up hatred against their victims. If you don’t play the game, they set out to ruin you. The British press are cowardly and evil.

    https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/mail/2021/2/11/5j9yu0locsj9hyumivin12mp0yf10t

    • harla says:

      People have longed talked about M&H’s reputation in Britain but fail to realize that their “reputation” has been decided by the royal rota and not by any actions of Meghan and/or Harry themselves. I hope that some ethical journalist will dive deep into the practice of “monstering” and also the relationship between the rota and royal family. The press spends almost no time on issues regarding the royals that people deserve to hear about like the Queen and Charles vetting legislation or Prince Andrew and his predilection for young girls and I’d like to know why. Why is the British press so intent on protecting certain members of this family?

    • Amelie says:

      That article made me sick. I don’t get how or why the tabloid press gets away with that. MM especially has never done anything to deserve the hatred she gets and yet all the haters yesterday were saying nothing was ever going to make her popular with the public. Just hated more. The press has done a great job manipulating these people though. It’s just insane.

      • Rosa D says:

        Agree. I once met someone who did shifts on the DM online celeb section. After she’d written her piece, the desk handed it back. She was told to rewrite it and make her copy more negative. E.g mention about cellulite & sweat stains.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      this is why the royal family fear them. they can easily stir up the public’s hatred and point out their excess and irrelevance. because of this they dance with the devil.

      • Lady D says:

        I don’t agree this is true anymore. There are far too many other forms of communication available today. The RF can use Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, Youtube, FaceBook, websites, even sites like Parler can get the RF’s message out. The printed press is no longer the most powerful game in town.
        Granted they did do a number on Meghan, but the heir and his backstabbing son have the power and means to fight back.

      • Harper says:

        Oh, the media still wields the power. It’s why Prince Incandescent has a total media blackout about his supposed affair. Prince Incandescent went to the courts, not to FB, Snapchat, or Instagram to stomp out the rumors that were running wild in 2019.

  12. Beth says:

    Damages if not agreed by settlement will be made public (in the amount), although people shouldn’t be too fixed on the figure because in England and Wales damages are compensatory or for restitution. There are few cases where damages are awarded for ‘pain and suffering’ but that’s usually capped. It’s the moral victory that counts and I think donating the damages is a lovely gesture.

  13. Cecilia says:

    I hope it will be atleast above the 5 million

  14. RoyalBlue says:

    i would keep every penny and put in trust for archie.

  15. TheOriginalMia says:

    Didn’t realize Meghan would be compensated from their profits on her stories. Well, that’s just icing on this cake, isn’t it? Her charities are going to benefit greatly from that money. The BM used and abused her for clicks, and now they are going to have to pay. Hahahahahahaha!

    • Beach Dreams says:

      I really hope that compensation from the profits is significant enough for the Fail to feel it in their pockets. These tabloids are allowed to run amok and pay a pittance (compared to their deep coffers) in the few times they’re forced to face the consequences of their destructiveness.

  16. Nives says:

    I’m so happy for Meghan!!

  17. Kalana says:

    Use the money to fund Archewell, their security, and their legal fund.

  18. Bibi says:

    She will be donating the money so I hope they pay real haaaaaaaaaaard cash

  19. Curryong says:

    I felt such happiness at the news that Meghan had won the case against the Fail. I hope she squeezes this newspaper group until their pips squeak. At least four million pounds please. The hell that both Meghan and Harry have been through in the past four years with the British tabloids are surely worth that.