Palace aide ‘regretted not giving evidence in Meg battle’
Source speaks out in appeal
A FORMER aide to the Duchess of Sussex regretted not giving evidence after she won her legal battle against a newspaper publisher, the Court of Appeal has heard.
Meghan, 40, won her High Court privacy claim after a judge found the publication of a letter she wrote to her estranged father was unlawful.
But Jason Knauf, Prince Harry and Meghan’s former communications secretary, claimed she had written the letter on the “understanding that it could be leaked”, according to a witness statement released on Wednesday.
Yesterday the court heard a source close to Knauf said he regretted not giving a statement to lawyers for Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Mail on Sunday, before the High Court case.
Knauf worked for the Sussexes until March 2019 before becoming CEO of
Prince William and wife Kate’s Royal Foundation, which he is due to leave at the end of the year.
Keith Mathieson, representing the publisher, told appeal court judges it was only in July this year, months after Meghan’s High Court triumph, that Associated Newspapers had “received information from a confidential source to the effect that Knauf now regretted not providing a witness statement to us”.
He added: “Mr Knauf was plainly a central figure in the events he describes.
“He was a senior and trusted member of the royal household staff and he continues to occupy an important position.
“His witness statement is measured in tone and he has been careful not to include evidence of matters beyond his own personal knowledge. Given the high-profile nature of this litigation and the likelihood of his evidence (if admitted) being widely reported, as well as the position he holds, it is hardly conceivable that he would say anything he did not believe to be true and I know of nothing in his evidence which is subject to any reasonable challenge.” Meghan sued Associated Newspapers Limited over five articles that reproduced parts of a “personal and private” letter she wrote to her father. Lord Justice Warby gave his High Court ruling in a summary judgment, avoiding the need for a trial. But ANL says the case should go to a trial on Meghan’s claims including breach of privacy and copyright. Andrew Caldecott QC, representing
ANL, told the court yesterday that the letter to Thomas Markle from Meghan was “not a loving letter, not a generous letter”, contrary to how it was presented.
Justin Rushbrooke QC, for Meghan, previously described the case as “very straightforward” and said that her human rights were “triply engaged” by the publication of part of the letter.
In her written evidence to the Court of Appeal, Meghan denied she thought it likely that her father would leak the letter, but “merely recognised that this was a possibility”.
She said: “To be clear, I did not want any of it to be published, and wanted to ensure that the risk of it being manipulated or misleadingly edited was minimised, were it to be exploited.”
Sir Geoffrey Vos, sitting with Dame Victoria Sharp and Lord Justice Bean, will give their ruling at a later date.