Many will remember when the drama with Meghan Markle's father began. Thomas Markle Sr. was tricked into staging photos of him searching for information about his daughter and soon-to-be son-in-law Prince Harry and then quickly became a menace to the Royal family. Now, Meghan Markle is holding the press responsible for the publishing of their private correspondence.

Meghan Markle's Lawsuit

When Mail on Sunday (owned by Associate News Ltd.) intercepted a letter correspondence sent from Meghan to her father and published it for their cover story, Meghan decided to finally fight back and take legal action. Prince Harry, Prince William, and Duchess Kate have all had to go head to head with the press via the courts when the press takes their "journalism" a step too far.

Meghan's lawyers have made a powerful statement in court this morning according to Hello!. Today a remote hearing was held to decide if there would be a summary judgment or not, which would mean the case could be resolved without having to continue with a trial.

The Royal Courts of Justice: Meghan Markle's high-profile lawsuit against a British newspaper group for privacy and copyright breaches returns to the High Court in London on January 19, 2021

Meghan's legal team said the personal letter was "a heartfelt plea from an anguished daughter to her father" sent to Thomas in Mexico "via a trusted contact to reduce the risk of interception." Meghan's representative Justin Rushbrooke QC understandably believed the "contents and character of the letter were intrinsically private, personal, and sensitive in nature" and Meghan "had a reasonable expectation of privacy of the contents of the letter."

A passage from the letter was read during the hearing that said, "I ask for nothing other than peace and I wish the same for you." Rushbrooke described this as a good "example as one could find of a letter that any person of ordinary sensibilities would not want to be disclosed to third parties, let alone in a mass media publication, in a sensational context and to serve the commercial purposes of the newspaper."

He argued that Associated News Ltd. had "no viable defense." According to Hello! the hearing will last two days and the judgment will be decided soon.