Meghan Markle is willing to take the stand in a legal battle with the British press, it was revealed today, setting up an extraordinary High Court showdown with her estranged father who she branded a liar.

The Duchess of Sussex, 38, is suing Associated Newspapers, owner of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, over an article which reproduced parts of a handwritten note she sent to Mr Markle, 75, in August 2018, three months after he was unable to walk her down the aisle following a heart attack.

The first stage of her case started at the High Court in London today where the publisher made an application to have parts of her claim thrown out. It was held via video link due to coronavirus.

Her celebrity barrister David Sherborne told the hearing his client had suffered 'great personal anguish and distress' as part of an alleged ‘agenda' against her in the press before making it clear Meghan would give evidence during any future trial.

He said: 'The defendant [Associated Newspapers] wants to cross-examine her [Meghan] as to whether that belief is reasonable or not - and they can do that'.

The Duchess's 'bring it on attitude' emerged near the end of the day’s proceedings, which the Sussexes are believed to have watched online from Los Angeles, where they have settled with their son Archie.

The High Court case has been dubbed 'Markle vs Markle' in which the duchess's estranged father Thomas, 75, is prepared to give evidence against his own daughter in a box office trial where a judge would decide who is telling the truth about their rift and the letter Meghan sent to him in August 2018.

On Monday court papers lodged by Meghan’s lawyers branded her father a liar and denied she knew her influential friends planned to reveal details of her deteriorating relationship with him - and her handwritten letter to him- with People magazine in America.

Thomas Markle has said he felt pressured to share the letter with the press after its contents were misrepresented and he was 'vilified' in the People article, telling the Mail on Sunday: 'I have to defend myself. I only released parts of the letter because other parts were so painful. The letter didn't seem loving to me. I found it hurtful.'

Meghan would also be asked under oath whether she knowingly' allowed her friends to leak details of the letter to People magazine to attack her father. These five unnamed best friends could also be forced to testify at the High Court in London.

The court heard today that Meghan alleges her estranged father Thomas was 'harassed and exploited' by the press despite not speaking to him for two years or asking if he agrees with her claims.

The estranged father of the Duchess of Sussex is expected to be called as a key witness for the defence in a court case she has brought against a newspaper (pictured: Meghan Markle as a youngster, with her father Thomas Markle)

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex leaving the Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey, London on Commonwealth Day, on March 9 this year, their last royal engagement before quitting for the US. The couple are understood to have watched some of today’s proceedings from LA

The case was heard online by judge Mr Justice Warby (bottom left), with Ms Markle represented by celebrity barrister David Sherborne and Associated Newspapers represented by Antony White QC

Five of Meghan Markle’s best friends could be called to give evidence in court and asked if they colluded with the Duchess to reveal that she had sent a letter to her father Five of Meghan's best friends could be called to give evidence in court. The 'inner circle' could be asked on oath if they colluded with the Duchess of Sussex to reveal that she had sent a letter to her father, Thomas. Mr Markle says he shared the letter with The Mail on Sunday only after Meghan's friends gave an interview about it to the US magazine People, and did so to show the world it was not the tender message her friends had suggested, the newspaper has said in its defence. In the bombshell February 2019 interview with the anonymous five women, one of them disclosed the existence of the letter but the duchess claims she was 'distressed' about this when she found out, according to a legal statement of her case lodged by her lawyers. Meghan initially declined to comment on the newspaper's claim that she had 'knowingly' allowed her friends to leak details of the letter, effectively breaching her own privacy. But this week she raised the stakes with an emphatic denial. Her lawyer David Sherborne wrote in the document filed to the court: '[She] did not know that her friends were giving an interview to People magazine, let alone that one of them would refer to the letter.' If the case proceeds to trial, it is possible the five friends could be asked to testify on oath about Meghan's claims. They have never been named, with People magazine referring to them as 'Meghan's inner circle – a longtime friend, a former co-star, a friend from LA, a onetime colleague and a close confidante'. Advertisement

Antony White QC, for Associated Newspapers, today told judge Mr Justice Warby it is 'curious' that the Mail on Sunday is accused of 'harassing, humiliating, manipulating and exploiting' Mr Markle when his daughter hasn't spoken to him.

He said claims made by Meghan about her father 'appear to have been put on to the record without the claimant (Ms Markle) having contacted her father to see if he agrees with them'.

Allegations by the Duchess of Sussex that Mail on Sunday articles were responsible for 'causing' the dispute between her and her estranged father are also 'objectionable', Mr White told the High Court.

Mr Justice Warby said at the end of today's six-hour hearing that he will give his ruling on Associated Newspapers' application at a later date, hopefully within the next week.

Today's routine hearing is a stepping stone to a full High Court trial in late 2020 or early 2021 that could see Meghan Markle and Thomas Markle coming face-to-face for the first time in more than two years and giving evidence against each other.

The text messages between Prince Harry, Meghan and Thomas Markle in the days before their wedding - and their public fallout May 13, 2018 One week before the wedding, it is revealed that Mr Markle staged 'paparazzi'-style photographs. May 15 2018 Mr Markle writes to his daughter stating he is sorry for the furore over the posed photographs, offers to make a public apology to both her and Prince Harry, and says he will not go to the wedding as he wants to spare her from any further embarrassment. Later that day, Mr Markle suffers chest pains and goes into hospital with suspected congestive heart failure. Three messages sent by Harry: 'Tom, it's Harry and I'm going to call you right now. Please pick up, thank you' 'Tom, Harry again! Really need to speak to u. U do not need to apologize, we understand the circumstances but 'going public' will only make the situation worse. If u love Meg and want to make it right please call me as there are two other options which don't involve u having to speak to the media, who incidentally created this whole situation. So please call me so I can explain. Meg and I are not angry, we just need to speak to u. Thanks' 'Oh any speaking to the press WILL backfire, trust me Tom. Only we can help u, as we have been trying from day 1'. Later on May 15 2018 Mr Markle taken into critical care in hospital diagnosed with suspected congestive heart failure. Mr Markle texted his daughter to say he was 'back in the hospital'. Meghan's legal document claims she 'first learned' of her father's heart attack hospitalisation from his statement to the American gossip website TMZ. Her text message response: 'I've been reaching out to you all weekend but you're not taking any of our calls or replying to any texts… Very concerned about your health and safety and have taken every measure to protect you but not sure what more we can do if you don't respond…Do you need help? Can we send the security team down again? I'm very sorry to hear you're in the hospital but need you to please get in touch with us… What hospital are you at?'. Ten minutes later, she wrote: 'Harry and I made a decision earlier today and are dispatching the same security guys you turned away this weekend to be a presence on the ground to make sure you're safe… they will be there at your disposal as soon as you need them. Please please call as soon as you can.. all of this is incredibly concerning but your health is most important'. Using Meghan's phone, Harry then sent a further message 'to provide Mr Markle with the details of the security team'. Harry 'pleaded with Mr Markle to let them help him'. May 16 2018 Mr Markle undergoes emergency heart surgery and apologises to his daughter that he will not be attending wedding, but receives a reply from Prince Harry 'admonishing Mr Markle for talking to the press and telling him to stop and accusing Mr Markle of causing hurt to his daughter. The text did not ask how the surgical procedure had gone or how Mr Markle was or send him good wishes. Mr Markle was deeply hurt and responded with a curt message: 'I've done nothing to hurt you Meghan or anyone else … I'm sorry my heart attack is there any inconvenience for you'. Meghan says that as a result of this 'unpleasant' message, she phoned her father 'a further four times within five minutes of the message being sent, but he declined to pick up.' Harry also texted Mr Markle from her phone: 'Tom, it's Harry, please answer your phone. I need to know this is actually you because it doesn't sound like you at all'. Meghan claims: 'No response was received.' Saturday May 19 - royal wedding day According to Meghan, she receives a missed call from Thomas Markle at 04.57am on morning of the wedding. Following the wedding TM says he tried to contact Meghan by phone and text, but received no response until the receipt of her Letter in August 2018. February 6, 2019 People magazine publishes 'The Truth about Meghan - Her Best Friends Break Their Silence'. Meghan's friends give interview about Meghan and her estrangement from Thomas Markle, including her letter. The article was reported on worldwide. But according to Meghan, she did not organise or authorise her friends to refer to the letter in People magazine February 7 2019 Kensington Palace refuses to comment on whether Meghan's friends had given the interview at the request of Meghan, or with her consent. February 10 2019 Thomas Markle gives a copy of the Letter to the Mail on Sunday together with his own account of the reasons for their estrangement. The newspaper then publishes extracts from letter and Thomas Markle's reply to People magazine correcting what he says were false and misleading slurs by Meghan's friends. Advertisement

Ms Markle claims her father's decision to give the note to the Mail on Sunday breached her privacy, copyright and data protection rights, and her legal team has claimed she was 'shocked and deeply upset' when her 'private letter' to Mr Markle was made public.

But the publisher wholly denies the allegations - particularly the claim that the letter was edited in any way that changed its meaning - and says it will hotly contest the case, claiming the story was in the public interest.

Associated Newspapers also allege that four days before the MoS piece on February 10 2019, the Duchess had already 'expressly or tacitly' allowed friends to leak the contents of the letter to People magazine, breaching her own privacy.

Thomas Markle has also claimed he felt pressured to share the letter with the press after its contents were misrepresented and he was 'vilified' in the People article, telling the Mail on Sunday: 'I have to defend myself. I only released parts of the letter because other parts were so painful. The letter didn't seem loving to me. I found it hurtful.'

Lawyers for The Mail On Sunday and MailOnline have also claimed that the Duchess of Sussex's 'immaculate' handwriting in a letter to her father is proof she intended it to be published.

Ms Markle's claim describes her father as 'vulnerable' despite her cutting all ties with him after their public fallout just before the royal wedding at St George's Chapel in Windsor.

At today's hearing lawyers for Associated Newspapers asked the court to 'strike out' parts of Meghan's case including claims the decision to publish the letter was malicious.

Antony White, for Associated Newspapers, also argued that part of Ms Markle's claim for damages is 'inadmissible' and 'should be struck out on the grounds of disproportionality', adding that if the court finds in her favour it 'would have consequences for the freedom of expression the press enjoys'.

The QC said the duchess alleges the publisher was 'one of the 'tabloid' newspapers which had been deliberately seeking to dig or stir up issues between her and her father' and was 'meddling' in their relationship.

Mr White said: 'The claimant has seen fit to put these allegations on the record without having spoken to Mr Markle, verifying these allegations with him or obtaining his consent', adding Ms Markle admits that she has had no contact with him since the wedding.

He added: 'It is therefore highly unlikely that she has any credible basis for these allegations of impropriety towards him'.

Mr White also took issue with the duchess's allegation that the publisher 'acted dishonestly' when deciding which parts of her letter to her father to publish.

He added: 'It is extremely common for the media to summarise or edit documents when reporting current events, and that is not a basis for an allegation of dishonesty. There is no basis for her to allege that anyone working for the defendant was dishonest in the drafting and editing process.'

He added that the key story at the centre of the court battle made it clear it contained 'excerpts' of the letter to Mr Markle from his youngest daughter.

Images in the story also showed it was only parts of the note, he said.

David Sherborne, for Ms Markle, later claimed the Mail on Sunday deliberately tried to 'dig or stir up' issues between her and her father. He claimed that father and daughter had a 'particularly warm' relationship before the royal wedding and their 'rift'.

He said: 'It is the defendent's actions in stirring up a rift that has been used as justification for publishing this letter', adding there was no public interest for the story.

Mr Sherborne also accused the defendant of trying 'to deceive the public by stating it was the full letter', when it was edited.

He also alleged the defendant left out parts of the letter in a 'calculated attempt' to portray Meghan in a 'negative light'.

Associated Newspapers denies the claims and said the article clearly stated the story contained 'excerpts' of the letter, Mr Sherborne said the letter was 'obviously private correspondence' and contained Meghan's 'deepest and most private thoughts' about her relationship with her father when he was ill and unable to give her away, adding 'she was deeply shocked and upset'.

He went on: 'There was no public interest served by the publication, which was neither presented as nor capable of contributing to a debate in democratic society relating to matters of legitimate public interest.

'Rather, it was disclosed with the sole and entirely gratuitous purpose of satisfying the curiosity of the defendant's readership about the ... private life of the claimant, a curiosity deliberately generated by the defendant.'

Mr Sherborne also argued that a number of 'intrusive and offensive' additional articles published by Associated Newspapers about the duchess should be taken into consideration in support of her privacy action, but not as part of the claim.

Mr Sherborne said: 'It is very much about the claimant's state of mind.'

He added that this was about 'the distress she feels about the realisation that the defendant has an agenda and that this is not a one-off'.

'It's all about distress, it's not about damage to reputation.'

The barrister also claimed the former Suits actress was completely unaware of the interview given to People Magazine in America by her friends, which referenced the letter to her father.

The Mail on Sunday alleges that Meghan allowed a group of five close confidants to leak details of the letter to People magazine on February 6 2019, which means the Duchess breached her own privacy.

Canadian TV star Jessica Mulroney, who supported the Sussexes when they initially moved to Vancouver earlier this year, has never commented on whether she was one of the sources.

Ms Markle insists her unnamed friends did it without her knowledge, according to court documents.

Sections of the letter were published in the newspaper and online in February last year, and it was announced in October that the duchess would be bringing legal action.

Meghan has branded Thomas a liar and denied she knew her influential friends planned to reveal details of their deteriorating relationship to an American magazine, court papers published earlier this week revealed.

Thomas Markle with a baby Meghan Markle. A picture shown in the Channel 5 documentary called Thomas Markle: My Story, that aired earlier this year

Meghan's neat handwriting and error-free letter to her father shows she expected it to be published, newspaper says Lawyers for The Mail On Sunday and MailOnline have claimed that the Duchess of Sussex's 'immaculate' handwriting in a letter to her father is proof she intended it to be published. The two outlets are in a legal battle with the duchess over the publication of the letter which she wrote to Thomas Markle in August 2018 about a series of allegations he had made about her in the press. In its defence, the company has said the duchess's care over the letter's presentation indicated she intended it to be disclosed to the public or believed that it would be. Documents submitted to the High Court by the publisher's legal team stated: 'It is to be inferred that the letter was written and sent by the claimant with a view to it being read by third parties and/or disclosed to the public, alternatively knowing that the same was very likely.' It continued: 'It is apparent from the letter that the claimant took great care over its presentation. 'The letter appears to have been being immaculately copied out by the claimant in her own elaborate handwriting from a previous draft. 'There are no crossings-out or amendments as there usually are with a spontaneous draft. 'It is to be inferred also from the care the claimant took over the presentation of the letter that she anticipated it being disclosed to and read by third parties.' Advertisement

Following the conclusion of today's hearing, Mr Justice Warby will decide whether to exclude a series of elements of her case, and said his 'ambition' was to publish in the week.

Experts believe the Duchess is 'playing a very high stakes game', which could see her facing her father in the High Court having cut off all contact with him since the royal wedding in May 2018.

Mark Stephens, a partner at Howard Kennedy, says if the case makes it to trial Meghan must testify - as well as her five anonymous friends who briefed People magazine about the contents of the letter before it was published by the Mail on Sunday.

Mr Stephens told Newsweek: 'This has become a very high stakes game for Meghan because ultimately it gets into a situation of whether she's telling the truth. All of her five friends are going to have to come into the case. They're going to have to be cross-examined, she's going to have to be cross-examined.

'The Mail on Sunday's QC is a brilliant cross-examiner. Even if she wins the case on a technicality she's going to lose the war. She's going to have huge lumps taken out of her reputationally.'

Gavin Millar QC, of Matrix Chambers, has predicted Ms Markle's claim against the Mail on Sunday will be pared back.

He said: 'I think the way the claim has been pleaded is overblown.

'They've turned what ought to be a very straight-forward case about the correspondence and the privacy issues into a sort of public inquiry into the Mail's journalism over a long period.

'There's a debate about whether the court should allow these kinds of things to go on. I think the court will pare the claim down from the way it's been pleaded and narrow it down. I think the court will do that and it should be done.'

If the case goes before a judge for trial, the paper said it would ask for Meghan to be forced to hand over all communications in which she had 'caused or permitted her friends to provide information about her to the media or to seek to influence what is published about her'.

Thomas Markle, a retired Hollywood lighting director who lives in Rosarito, Mexico, has said his daughter cut off all contact with him after her wedding, except for the letter at the centre of the case. If he were to be called as a witness, he would effectively have to brand his own daughter a liar who had invaded her own privacy.

Meghan Markle branded her father Thomas a liar and denied she knew her influential friends planned to reveal details of their deteriorating relationship to an American magazine, court papers published earlier this week revealed.

Prince Harry 'pleaded' with Meghan's father to accept their help in the fraught days before their wedding, it was claimed.

He wrote in a text message to Thomas Markle: 'If u love Meg and want to make it right please call me.'

These previously unseen messages from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex cast new light on the breakdown in Meghan's relationship with her father and she effectively calls him a liar.

In one message, Harry told him: 'Speaking to the press WILL backfire, trust me Tom. Only we can help u.'

The extraordinary High Court case has been dubbed 'Markle vs Markle' in which the duchess's estranged father, 75, is prepared to give evidence against his own daughter.

Mr Markle had also made desperate attempts to mend their relationship after heart surgery forced him to miss the 2018 royal wedding, it was said.

On Monday, her legal team filed papers setting out her version of events, and detailing messages she and Harry had sent her father.

She admits five of her closest friends talked to People, but said it was without her knowledge – and she was 'distressed' they mentioned the letter.

She also claims she did not receive his texts after the wedding 'reaching out to you'.

The papers submitted on Monday by the duchess' legal team also state: 'Mr Markle did not answer truthfully when asked about the photographs taken and staged by a paparazzo photographer…'

Thomas Markle showing souvenirs he keeps on mantlepiece of Harry and Meghan from the wedding he was unable to attend

Some of Mr Markle's messages to his daughter were detailed in defence papers filed in January at the High Court in London by the Mail on Sunday.

The documents said that after Mr Markle messaged his daughter saying he couldn't come to her wedding because he had been taken to hospital for emergency heart surgery, he received a text from Harry 'admonishing' him for talking to the Press.

Sent on May 16, the same day as his operation, the text from Harry did not ask how Mr Markle was, the newspaper's legal document said. It said Mr Markle was deeply hurt and responded: 'I'm sorry my heart attack is … any inconvenience for you'.

The Mail on Sunday's case is that she effectively breached her own privacy because Mr Markle had kept his daughter's handwritten note private for months, and only revealed it to expose false claims that the duchess had been reaching out to repair the relationship.

Meghan 'knowingly' allowed five close friends to leak details of the letter to People magazine to attack her father, the newspaper's document stated.

The result was a 'one-sided' interview published on February 6, 2019, in the celebrity weekly headlined: 'Her best friends break their silence' and 'The truth about Meghan'.

The defence papers said: 'Thomas Markle only released Meghan's letter to the world to show it was not the 'loving' plea her friends had been making out.'



