‘Palace Four’ involved in dispute between Meghan and Associated Newspapers | Meghan, Duchess of Sussex

Four former employees of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex may have evidence shedding light on the circumstances of Meghan’s letter to her estranged father, the High Court has learned.

Any role in the so-called ‘Palace Four’ needed further investigation, and was one of the reasons the Duchess’ action against the Mail on Sunday should proceed to a full trial, the newspaper’s editors argued.

Meghan, 39, is suing Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) for publishing excerpts from her 2018 private letter to Thomas Markle, 76, which was reproduced in February 2019 in five Mail on Sunday and Mail Online articles.

His lawyers are seeking “summary judgment,” which would see part of his privacy case resolved without a trial, and argue that the judge, Judge Warby, should rule in his favor because ANL has no real chance of success. success.

On the second day of the hearing, Antony White QC, for ANL, said that “oral evidence and documentary evidence will likely be available at trial, which would shed light on some key factors in the case.”

One of the issues concerned the circumstances under which the letter was drafted, “which we now know involved the Kensington Palace communications team, a curious element for an entirely private letter,” he said. declared to the judge.

ANL claims Meghan intended the letter to be used as part of a ‘media strategy’, which the Duchess has denied.

White said a letter from attorneys representing the “Palace Four” indicated they would be able to “shed light” on the drafting. The four are Jason Knauf, then the royal couple’s communications secretary, who ANL said “was involved” in drafting the letter; former communications staff Christian Jones and Sara Latham; and former private secretary Samantha Cohen.

The lawyers’ letter on behalf of the four, sent to the legal teams on both sides, indicated that neither of them welcomed the involvement in the case, which had only arisen from functions in their respective jobs at the time of the facts. “Neither of our clients wishes to take sides in the dispute between your respective clients. Our clients are all strictly neutral, ”he says.

“They have no interest in helping either party to the proceedings. Their only interest is to ensure a level playing field, with regard to the evidence they could provide. But they would provide court assistance if they could, he said.

The letter went on to say that it was the preliminary opinion of their lawyers “that one or more of our clients would be able to shed some light” on “the creation of the letter and the electronic project”.

They might also be able to shed some light on ‘whether or not the requester intended that the letter might enter the public domain’, and whether Meghan ‘directly or indirectly provided private information’ to the authors of the unauthorized biography of the couple. , Find freedom.

Justin Rushbrooke QC, on behalf of Meghan, said in written submissions that the letter from the so-called Palace Four did not contain any information supporting ANL’s claims that Knauf co-wrote the letter at the center of the dispute. Meghan’s case is that Knauf provided comments on a draft, but no wording.

Meghan is seeking damages from ANL for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and violation of data protection law.

The judge is expected to render his decision on his summary judgment request at a later date.