* British court rules newspaper breached royal's privacy
* Meghan sued tabloid for printing parts of letter to father
* She says damage caused by paper 'runs deep'
* Newspaper says it may appeal decision
(Adds lawyer)
By Michael Holden
LONDON, Feb 11 (Reuters) - Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex,
said on Thursday a British tabloid had been held to account for
its "dehumanizing practices" after she won a privacy claim
against the paper for printing extracts of a letter she wrote to
her father.
Meghan, 39, the wife of Queen Elizabeth's grandson Prince
Harry, sued publisher Associated Newspapers after its Mail on
Sunday tabloid printed parts of the handwritten letter she sent
to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018.
Last month, her lawyers asked Judge Mark Warby to rule in
her favour without the need for a trial which could have pitted
her against her father, who gave a witness statement on behalf
of the paper and who she has not seen since her wedding in May
2018.
Warby ruled the articles were a clear breach her privacy.
The newspaper said it was considering an appeal.
"After two long years of pursuing litigation, I am grateful
to the courts for holding Associated Newspapers and The Mail on
Sunday to account for their illegal and dehumanizing practices,"
Meghan said in a statement.
She said the tactics of the paper and its sister
publications had gone for too long without consequence.
"For these outlets, it's a game. For me and so many others,
it's real life, real relationships, and very real sadness. The
damage they have done and continue to do runs deep," she said.
Meghan wrote the five-page letter to Markle after their
relationship collapsed in the run-up to her glittering wedding
to Harry in May 2018, which her father missed due to ill health
and after he admitted posing for paparazzi pictures.
'TRIPLE-BARRELLED' ASSAULT
In two days of hearings last month, her lawyers said
printing the "personal and sensitive" letter was a
"triple-barrelled" assault on "her private life, her family life
and her correspondence" and plainly breached her privacy.
The paper argued the duchess intended the letter's contents
to become public and it formed part of a media strategy,
pointing out she had admitted in court papers discussing it with
her communications secretary.
The Mail, which published extracts in February 2019, said it
did so to allow Markle to respond to comments made by Meghan's
anonymous friends in interviews with the U.S. magazine People.
"For the most part they did not serve that purpose at all,"
Warby said in his ruling. "Taken as a whole the disclosures were
manifestly excessive and hence unlawful. There is no prospect
that a different judgment would be reached after a trial."
He said the duchess had a reasonable expectation the
letter's contents would remain private and the Mail had
"interfered with that reasonable expectation".
The judge also ruled the printed extracts were an
infringement of her copyright, but said there needed to be a
trial to decide damages over the "minor" issue of who owned the
copyright, because of the involvement of senior royal aides in
its drafting.
"We are very surprised by today's summary judgment and
disappointed at being denied the chance to have all the evidence
heard and tested in open court at a full trial," the paper said
in a statement.
"We are carefully considering the judgment's contents and
will decide in due course whether to lodge an appeal."
There will be a hearing on March 2 to discuss next steps in
the case.
Prominent British media laywer Mark Stephens said the
verdict without a trial was unexpected. "This is a bad day for
press freedom and a good day for the duchess," he told the Daily
Telegraph newspaper. "Nobody saw this judgment coming."
Meghan and Harry's relations with Britain's tabloid press
collapsed after they got married, with media intrusion a major
factor in their decision to step down last March from royal
duties and move to the United States with baby son Archie.
The couple have said they would have "zero engagement" with
four papers, including the Daily Mail, accusing them of false
and invasive coverage.
"The world needs reliable, fact-checked, high-quality news.
What The Mail on Sunday and its partner publications do is the
opposite," said Meghan.
"We all lose when misinformation sells more than truth, when
moral exploitation sells more than decency, and when companies
create their business model to profit from people's pain."
(Reporting by Michael Holden; Editing by Janet Lawrence and
Marguerita Choy)
