Duke and Duchess of Sussex All Legal Actions Part 2

[wannable]

Harry is. He used it yesterday in his hearing.

[HistoryGirl2]

I?m interested to see how the judge rules on this because there?s a lot of moving parts here to consider.

I?m also not sure about his argument saying the family kept him in the dark about the whole thing. His own lawyer states that he was aware of the phone hacking, and that William knew more about it (gosh will the pettiness ever cease 😂) but that he was in Afghanistan on active duty at the time. So, he did know but didn?t make an effort to find out more about it. Sounds like a personal choice to me.

[wannable]

Simon Vigar was at the hearing yesterday.  Too many official social media accounts that ARE in royal rota. All have said Harry did not want to settle like W, he wanted to go to court, and that is what he is actually doing. He is at his hearings wishing the judge decides for a Go.

Simon Vigar https://twitter.com/i/status/1650896197685526530

Washington Post Prince William paid settlement by Rupert Murdoch in phone hacking case - The Washington Post

[TLLK]

Today's social media trend with W settlement is this.

Please provide a link to the social media post that you have shared. Thank you.

[wannable]

Harry claims Wills 'quietly' settled hacking case for a 'very large sum' - The Mail

Richard Eden
Subscribe through Mail Plus

[Kristeh-H]

A lot of suits are settled quietly out of court.  Harry is trying to make this appear nefarious when it's perfectly normal.  He is very tiresome with his petulant, unrelenting attacks. 

[HistoryGirl2]

^I wonder if representatives from the family will have to testify to the veracity of that statement. News Group claims there was no private deal. Now, I wouldn?t bet money on anyone associated with Rupert Murdoch to lie if it would mean staying out of court, so I wonder if the judge might ask for verification from the family.

[wannable]

A lot of suits are settled quietly out of court.  Harry is trying to make this appear nefarious when it's perfectly normal.  He is very tiresome with his petulant, unrelenting attacks. 

In the UK 90% Settlements  is out of court avoiding a lawsuit

Source: Read between 20 to 40 pages and learn
https://www.gov.uk/apply-transcript-court-tribunal-hearing#:~:text=You%20may%20be%20able%20to,2d%20of%20the%20guidance%20notes.

*****

The Duke of Sussex appears to have 'factual inconsistencies' in his legal claim about being a victim of hacking, a senior judge said.
Mr Justice Fancourt said he has concerns about Harry's account of an alleged secret deal by the royal family, which he says prevented him bringing legal action earlier.

The judge questioned why details of Harry's legal claim filed in 2020 failed to include the alleged secret deal which the duke now says means the publisher accepted it would not try to block his compensation claim because it was too old.
The judge added: 'Another thing that is troubling is what appears to be a factual inconsistency in the current pleaded cases that the Duke of Sussex did not have the knowledge [of the alleged wrongdoing] before 2019 and your proposed amendment seems to say he would have brought the claim in 2012 but for the secret agreement.'
Harry's barrister, David Sherborne, said the claim in 2012 would have been 'totally different'. He said there was a 'draft' of an amended particulars of claim which contains the alleged secret deal.
The judge replied: 'I am talking about the factual inconsistencies in the case as pleaded.'

Prince Harry?s phone-hacking claim has ?inconsistencies?

The Times, it's quite complicated the amount of cases Harry has?! Murdoch group, Daily Mail Group, The Daily Mirror.  All 3 separate plus the Home Office, 4.

[HistoryGirl2]

^I agree with the judge. There are inconsistencies that he needs to answer for. On the one hand, he seems to admit he was aware, but this secret deal stopped him. Yet he made no mention of it earlier and has yet to provide proof that it exists. I think some clarification should be done because these claims appear muddled and vague.

[wannable]

The firm represented both brothers in their phone hacking claim until 2019 when, by his own admission, Harry became frustrated with the slow progress and decided to go his own way with a new solicitor.

lawyer Gerrard Tyrell, of Harbottle & Lewis

In revealing that his brother 'was paid a very large sum' by Rupert Murdoch's News Group Newspapers (NGN) in 2020, and claiming the palace had a 'secret agreement' with the media mogul, the implication is that William settled out of court because he was in cahoots with the press.
Yet as is ever the case with claims made by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, recollections may vary. Since 90 per cent of civil claims are settled out of court in the UK, William merely did the same as most phone hacking victims in opting for a payout rather than going to trial.
Far from being in hock to Murdoch, he appears to have taken around '1 million out of NGN's coffers while sparing himself the ordeal of a court appearance.

Camilla Tominey
Blindsided by Prince Harry again, the Royals must be feeling hacked off

[wannable]

They include the claim, which has not been denied by Kensington Palace, that Prince William secretly received a large payout from the company in 2020 to compensate him for his phone being hacked.

he has once again claimed that his own interests were sacrificed to protect the public image of his stepmother

Victoria Warde
The 10 revelations from Prince Harry's witness statement in the Murdoch media case

Basically if one reads both articles, Harry is very impatient. He left on his own accord, the latter article he moans in his 31 pages that the 'system' is slow and obstructs.

IF he would have stayed focused in the same lane as W, he would have gotten his settlement.

[TLLK]

Basically if one reads both articles, Harry is very impatient. He left on his own accord, the latter article he moans in his 31 pages that the 'system' is slow and obstructs.

IF he would have stayed focused in the same lane as W, he would have gotten his settlement.

Is it true that Harry's settlement would have been less than William's as his phone was not hacked as many times as his brother's?

[wannable]

That is a tricky question, Harry want's GBP 200,000.

18 years ago the herein quote, which royal watchers rather than royal rota is discussing the tricky question via social media. Source: use the search button in Twitter, Instagram, Tik Tok....royal watchers, citizens like you and me who have been following for 10 or 20 years plus are doing their maths. 

Former News of the World royal editor Clive Goodman hacked Kate Middleton's phone 155 times, a court has heard. The phone-hacking trial was told Mr Goodman first hacked the now-Duchess of Cambridge's voicemail in December 2005. He also hacked Prince William 35 times and Prince Harry on nine occasions

[Curryong]

From the Guardian newspaper.

Queen Elizabeth II personally threatened Rupert Murdoch?s media company with legal proceedings over phone hacking only for her efforts to be undermined by the then Prince Charles, the high court has heard. Prince Harry said his father intervened because he wanted to ensure the Sun supported his ascension to the throne and Camilla?s role as queen consort, and had a ?specific long-term strategy to keep the media on side? for ?when the time came?.

The Duke of Sussex made the claims on Tuesday as part of his ongoing legal action against News Group Newspapers. The legal case lays bare Harry?s allegations of the deals between senior members of the British royal family and tabloid newspapers. The prince said his father, the king, had personally demanded he stop his legal cases against British newspaper outlets when they were filed in late 2019.

The court filings state: ?I was summoned to Buckingham Palace and specifically told to drop the legal actions because they have an ?effect on all the family?.? He added this was ?a direct request (or rather demand) from my father? and senior royal aides.

In 2017, Harry decided to seek an apology from Murdoch?s News UK for phone hacking, receiving the backing of Queen Elizabeth II and his brother. His submission said: ?William was very understanding and supportive and agreed that we needed to do it. He therefore suggested that I seek permission from ?granny?. I spoke to her shortly afterwards and said something along the lines of: ?Are you happy for me to push this forward, do I have your permission?? and she said: ?Yes.??

Having received the support of Queen Elizabeth II, Harry said he asked the royal family?s lawyers to write to the Murdoch executives Rebekah Brooks and Robert Thomson and seek a resolution. Yet the company refused to apologise and, out of desperation, Harry discussed banning reporters from Murdoch-owned outlets from attending his wedding to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. In 2018, Sally Osman, Queen Elizabeth II?s communications secretary, wrote an email to Harry explaining that she was willing to threaten legal action in the name of the monarch.

The email read: ?The queen has given her consent to send a further note, by email, to Robert Thomson, CEO of News Corporation and Rebekah Brooks, CEO of News UK. Her Majesty has approved the wording, which essentially says there is increasing frustration at their lack of response and engagement and, while we?ve tried to settle without involving lawyers, we will need to reconsider our stance unless we receive a viable proposal.?

However, there was no apology, which Harry ascribes to a secret deal between the royal family and senior Murdoch executives to keep proceedings out of court. Harry claimed that, shortly before his wedding, he was informed Murdoch?s company would not apologise to the queen and the rest of the royal family at that stage because ?they would have to admit that not only was the News of the World involved in phone hacking but also the Sun?, which they ?couldn?t afford to do? as it would undermine their continued denials that illegal activity took place at the Sun.

Harry now believes his father and royal courtiers were prioritising positive coverage of his father and Camilla in the Sun, rather than seeking to back his legal claims. He said: ?[T]hey had a specific long-term strategy to keep the media (including [Sun publisher] NGN) onside in order to smooth the way for my stepmother (and father) to be accepted by the British public as queen consort (and king respectively) when the time came ? anything that might upset the applecart in this regard (including the suggestion of resolution of our phone-hacking claims) was to be avoided at all costs.?

[wannable]

That is a tricky question, Harry want's GBP 200,000.

18 years ago the herein quote, which royal watchers rather than royal rota is discussing the tricky question via social media. Source: use the search button in Twitter, Instagram, Tik Tok....royal watchers, citizens like you and me who have been following for 10 or 20 years plus are doing their maths.

Chelsy Davy 60 calls to his mobile. Allegedly She won't support him. The latest news when he came to London, he called her on a friends phone rather than his phone, she was polite and diplomatic, Ends. ''I am over that, moved on''

[wannable]

I rather believe the combo of The Telegraph and The Times rather than The Guardian. Camilla Tominey said Harry admitted that he split from William and Harbottle because they were too slow.  This type of lawsuits are slow. The end result is what matters, W got his settlement, H didn't and now is battling.

[HistoryGirl2]

Chelsy Davy 60 calls to his mobile. Allegedly She won't support him. The latest news when he came to London, he called her on a friends phone rather than his phone, she was polite and diplomatic, Ends. ''I am over that, moved on''

If this is true, I don?t blame her. Who would want to relive that nightmare? Again, uncomfirmed, but if she did decline it that way, so proud of her for having moved on. I also read an interview a while back where she declined to comment on their time together. Class act. She could have made herself a pretty penny selling their story.

[HistoryGirl2]

I rather believe the combo of The Telegraph and The Times rather than The Guardian. Camilla Tominey said Harry admitted that he split from William and Harbottle because they were too slow.  This type of lawsuits are slow. The end result is what matters, W got his settlement, H didn't and now is battling.

I?m a bit confused. Is this in doubt? Harry said himself that he wasn?t getting the apology he wanted from Murdoch and he told William he wanted to sue himself and William said he should speak with the Queen about it.

To be honest, it?s hard to follow his line of thinking a lot of the time. He?s insinuating that the bad coverage he gets is because he refused the settlement and William and Charles didn?t and that it was part of a conspiracy to make sure they never got bad press. It?s almost as if he?s unaware that in a court of law you have to prove things. It?s not an Oprah interview. What kind of counsel is he receiving? I?m glad the judge brought attention to the inconsistencies.

[wannable]

Where is the written consent from the Queen Elizabeth II.  The Guardian claims the lawyer was willing to write (sue, make a lawsuit, etc.) in behalf of the monarch, that Harry this and that, but where is the proof of QEII? They never wrote anything in behalf of the previous Monarch. HE would have used it. He is trashing his dad, Camilla, William in writing, said his grandma had approved, where is the approval?

[HistoryGirl2]

^Well, that?s where I think if I were the judge, I?d demand proof of all this because as it stands, it?s just pure hearsay and we all know how shaky Harry?s memory of events can be.

[Curryong]

Where is the written consent from the Queen Elizabeth II.  The Guardian claims the lawyer was willing to write (sue, make a lawsuit, etc.) in behalf of the monarch, that Harry this and that, but where is the proof of QEII? They never wrote anything in behalf of the previous Monarch. HE would have used it. He is trashing his dad, Camilla, William in writing, said his grandma had approved, where is the approval?

Harry appears to have submitted the email he received from the late Queen?s Comms Sec (she is not a lawyer, but a civil servant within BP Household) into court documents. He quotes the main text of the email. The Comms Sec is a senior official of the Royal Household. She would hardly have been communicating with Harry on the issue without permission from the Queen herself.

[wannable]

I suppose the email is in the 31 pages?!

[HistoryGirl2]

^But does this email make reference to the secret agreement and what the terms were? The agreement is the crux of his argument. He claims he wasn?t allowed to sue prior because of the agreement. The judge asks his solicitor why he never made mention of it when he initially sued. And also that he claims not to have had knowledge of wrongdoing before 2019, which would be contradictory if he said what held him back was he deal; implying that he was aware of the wrongdoing.

And if the deal is the reason why he couldn?t sue before and not actually lack of knowledge of wrongdoing, then proof should be required about the secret deal. News Group claims nothing was agreed about that, so that?s why I wonder if members of the Palace?s legal team would be subpoenaed to testify.

[wannable]

If you read the article of the Times, Harry supposedly (supposedly no, it IS RECORDED in the hearing, his own lawyers went nuts with the back and forth of years of knowing) knew 2012, 2019 (when he separated from W), 2020, but decided to add it now April 2023. (by law it is too late, the too late deadline we've been reading, hearing for sometime)

The journalist did a good job separating by year/paragraph that H lawyers, meaning H said in the hearing that he knew about the settlement negotiations, let's call it like that since 2012.  So Harry was on course like W, but split with W 2019, Camilla T says he felt it was too slow. The Guardian says its the men in Grey in behalf of C to make C look good, but then the UK Gov Page is with Camilla Tominey with the stat of 90% of civil lawsuits are settled out of court...that means mathematically every week.

It is no wonder the Judge wants more clarification.  Hearing continuous....that is how it ends in the Times article.

[HistoryGirl2]

^I expect ?inconsistencies? with him, but I?m really quite shocked that a solicitor would go up in front of a judge like this. And I?d imagine he could afford the best.

I?m interested to hear about it. I would like to know if there was money exchanged to keep bad stories out of the papers because that?s bribery. That?s what he is insinuating with his comments. I would like proof because, if true, that is unacceptable. It?s like the racism claim. You can?t just drop a bomb like that to titillate and not tell us the whole of the events. These are serious allegations.