Mr Justice Nicklin added: “It is possible to ‘spin’ facts in a way that does not mislead, but the claim made in the article was very much that the purpose was to mislead the public.
“This provides the necessary element to make the meanings defamatory at common law.”
The senior judge also found that the article did not suggest that Harry was “trying to keep his ‘legal battle’ with the government a secret”, although that is what the headline suggests if read on its own.
He continued: “Read as a whole, the article was quite clear that he was seeking certain confidentiality restrictions in relation to ‘documents and witness statements’ in the proceedings, not complete secrecy of the entire claim.”
The judge found that the average reader would have understood the article to mean that Harry had “initially sought privacy restrictions which were far-reaching and unduly broad and were rightly challenged by the Home Office”.
Friday’s ruling only concerned the “objective meaning” of the article, Mr Justice Nicklin said, adding that it was the first stage of the defamation claim.
Friday’s ruling is the first stage of the Duke of Sussex’s defamation suit against Associated Newspapers Limited, with the publisher now due to present its defense in the case.
Mr Justice Nicklin said in his judgment: “The decision made in this judgment relates solely to the objective meaning of the article published by the defendant for the purposes of the plaintiff’s defamation claim.
“This is the first phase of a defamation claim.
“The next step will be for the defendant to present a defense to the claim.
“It will be a matter for determination later in the proceedings whether the claim succeeds or fails, and if so, on what grounds.”
Add Comment