Meghan Markle could be forced to rely on 'luxury freebies' as her husband Prince Harry scrambles for cash following his legal defeat, according to a News 24 host. The Duchess of Sussex has a reputation among luxury brands for being 'particularly fond of a freebie', said Danica De Giorgio.
Legal defeat leaves Harry with £34m bill
Harry lost his High Court claim against the Daily Mail's publishers over alleged unlawful information gathering last month, leaving him liable for a legal bill of £34million. The Duke and Duchess may now look to scrimp and save, with Meghan potentially returning to her 'cash for comment' ways.
'They're in a world of pain after the loss to the Daily Mail,' said De Giorgio. 'So maybe Meghan will have to start doing the cash for comment again. Apparently, she has a reputation among luxury brands for being particularly fond of a freebie.'
Claims of freebie love after royal wedding
Author Tina Brown claimed in a 2022 book that Meghan was 'hungry for luxury freebies even after joining the Royal Family' and continued to express interest in 'receiving bags of designer swag'.
Talk TV host Samara Gill suggested Meghan's love of a handout after her wedding in 2018 amounted to a breach of royal protocol. 'It's so revealing,' she said. 'You're not allowed to accept commercial gifts or freebies when you are a royal, so she was breaking it on day one. Even after a taxpayer-funded wedding, she still wanted a few freebies from a publicist. It shows you who that woman really is.'
Publisher seeks costs in 'speculative' case
The Daily Mail's publisher demanded an initial £10million payment from Harry and his fellow claimants in late July after their 'speculative' £50million privacy case was thrown out. Associated Newspapers' lead barrister, Anthony White KC, accused the claimants, who also included Sir Elton John, of pursuing a 'highly unreasonable and inexcusable' case, without any supporting documentary evidence.
'It led to significant costs and time being wasted by Associated in preparing to meet allegations, only to find them being subsequently abandoned or changed at trial,' he said.
Harry's legal team called the publisher's estimated figure of £34million 'astonishingly high' and suggested it wanted to 'teach the claimants a lesson' by seeking the maximum possible financial redress.
