In a recent legal development, Prince Harry faced a setback in his libel suit against the Mail on Sunday publisher. A British High Court judge, Matthew Nicklin, ruled against Prince Harry’s attempt to prevent the Mail on Sunday publisher from employing an “honest opinion” defense.
The lawsuit, initiated by Harry against Associated Newspapers over a 2022 news article related to his British security arrangements, alleged that the report falsely implied dishonesty on his part and an attempt to manipulate public opinion. However, Judge Nicklin determined that the Mail on Sunday could potentially succeed in using the “honest opinion” defense if the case were to proceed.
In his ruling, Judge Nicklin expressed the view that the defendant might demonstrate at trial that public statements issued on behalf of Prince Harry aimed to present his judicial review claim as a noble battle against the government’s decision to deny him funding for security.
The judge suggested that the portrayal might have been misleading and intended to cast the claimant’s judicial review claim in a positive light, while downplaying the potential negative perception of the claimant seeking the reinstatement of taxpayer-funded state security.
Under British law, the honest opinion defense provides protection to publishers against defamation claims when statements are presented as opinions rather than false statements of fact.
The case is slated to proceed to trial next year. This ruling follows Prince Harry’s recent High Court hearing, during which he argued that he had been treated unfairly in light of security concerns being downgraded after he stepped down from official royal duties and relocated to the United States in 2020.