Sussex' claim - mostly thrown out.. Not what the beeb says

Sponsored Links
Complain to ofcom?

They do mention the judges criticisms and link to the actual judgement.
 
Just to check

The BBC page you link says

"Prince Harry's case could go to trial in the High Court next year after a judge ruled on Thursday that parts of his claim can proceed.
While his allegations of some illegal methods will go to trial, a judge dismissed his phone-hacking claims."

Is any part of that untrue?

Is the headline untrue?
"Prince Harry set for court showdown with The Sun publisher"
 
Mr Justice Fancourt said Harry's amended case submitted earlier this year - which was reliant on the existence of the "secret agreement" - did not "reach the necessary threshold of plausibility and cogency".

He said emails between the Palace and NGN suggested there was "at some time an understanding" that the Royal Family's claims "would be addressed informally" at a late date, but the "vague and limited" evidence provided by Harry's lawyers did not amount to proof of Harry's specific claims.

From 2012, the judge ruled, Harry was "on notice" that he may have been hacked after finding out about the practice at the News of the World.
The judge said Harry "could easily" have had his lawyers investigate further, at which point a "much fuller picture would have emerged". The judge said the phone-hacking claim was therefore too late.
 
Sponsored Links
Murdochcat said:
Does anybody care about these individuals ?
Click to expand...
Sadly yes, the obsessed right wing media who make money out of these stories with the added bonus of fighting culture wars.

Let’s hope he shafts them when it goes to trial

Blup
 
motorbiking said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Prince Harry set for court showdown with The Sun publisher

A judge rules that a High Court trial over the Duke of Sussex's privacy breach claims can go ahead.
www.bbc.co.uk

Pretty poor reporting from the beeb in the headline..

Judgement shows a different story. 69 - 73 basically calling him a fibber.

Click to expand...
His lawyer tried some ambitious arguments, the basic evidence that the gutter press hacked their through this and hundreds of other settled claims remains valid. That’s real sustained and widespread misuse of personal data, nothing like fadr-rage

Blup
 
Murdochcat said:
Does anybody care about these individuals ?
Click to expand...
the right wing media and their followers dont care about these individuals at all.......... its why they spend their whole time talking about them :ROFLMAO:
 
blup said:
His lawyer tried some ambitious arguments, the basic evidence that the gutter press hacked their through this and hundreds of other settled claims remains valid. That’s real sustained and widespread misuse of personal data, nothing like fadr-rage

Blup
Click to expand...
Yes the whole phone hacking scandal was appalling, but arguing that you only knew about the potential to make a claim, in 2018, when you were made aware of the issue in 2012, made him look a bit of a t*t, particularly given the language used in the ruling. He has access to the best lawyers in the world and a massive machine that meant he could easily have brought a claim within the time limits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top