Duke of Sussex

Proceedings were temporarily paused last month to allow both sides to negotiate, but they failed to reach a settlement before the deadline.

In July, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled in the Duke’s favour in the first stage of the claim, concluding that the royal was defamed by parts of the story because it suggested that his actions were "discreditable" and that he had intended to "mislead the public". The Duke’s lawyers have argued in his case that he made an offer to pay for security for himself and his family whenever they are in the UK at a meeting at Sandringham in January 2020, at which the late Queen and King Charles were present. However, part of ANL’s defence is that the offer was not made or communicated to the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec). The Duke argued that the story suggested he had lied and had "improperly and cynically tried to manipulate and confuse public opinion". He sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over an article published last February that said he had tried to keep "secret" parts of his legal fight with the Home Office over his security and had attempted to "spin" the dispute in his favour by claiming he had offered to pay for police protection. The Duke of Sussex is to ask a High Court judge to rule in his favour without a trial in his libel case against the Mail on Sunday, as he aims to echo his wife’s legal success against the same newspaper.