In the photo on the left, we see a file photo of former U.S. President Donald Trump. On the right, we have a file photo of Christopher Steele, the former MI6 officer who wrote a report on Donald Trump’s alleged links to Russia.
A London judge has ruled that former President Donald Trump must pay nearly $400,000 to a private intelligence company owned by former British spy Christopher Steele. This comes as a result of an unsuccessful data protection lawsuit that was previously dismissed by the same judge earlier this year.
Judge Karen Steyn made a ruling on February 1, stating that the 45th president does not have valid reasons to bring a claim for compensation or damages. As a result, judgment was entered in favor of the company.
On Thursday, Steyn issued an order for Trump to pay a minimum of 300,000 pounds sterling in initial legal fees, which amounts to approximately $384,000 at the current exchange rates. It is worth noting that the former president’s final expenses could potentially exceed this amount and reach double the initial estimate.
Related Coverage:
The judge has issued an order, as reported by the London-based PA News Agency, requiring Trump to cover the full cost of the claim.
According to Steyn, Steele’s company claims that the total cost of defending against the lawsuit has exceeded 600,000 pounds sterling. However, the judge has ruled that Trump is initially required to pay only half of that amount, pending a final decision by a specialist judge.
The lawsuit filed by Trump against Orbis Business Intelligence was initiated in October 2022 in the High Court of Justice King’s Bench Division. Later on, an additional claim was added, and Orbis responded by requesting summary judgment.
The failed lawsuit revolved around the scandalous claims presented in the discredited Steele dossier. However, in her dismissal of the case, Steyn chose not to delve into the substance of the allegations and instead focused on procedural grounds.
In February 2023, Trump’s legal team decided to amend the lawsuit and sue Orbis based on two U.K. data protection laws passed in 2018. Additionally, they included a claim based on a 1998 data protection law.
The judge ultimately concluded that Trump’s lawsuit lacked any valid claims under the 2018 laws. This was because the two laws in question were implemented well after the memos in the 2016 dossier had already been completed. Additionally, it was determined that the six-year statute of limitations for the claim based on the 1998 law had already expired by the time Trump’s English barrister, Hugh Tomlinson, decided to include that particular claim.
Trump’s revised lawsuit focused on two distinct and explicit memos from the dossier, which included a total of 17 memos.
There has been no substantiation for any of these claims.
Steyn emphasizes in her dismissal that her judgment does not address the alleged personal and reputational damage and distress mentioned by Trump in his initial complaint.
The judgment makes it clear that the Defendant has not argued that the Claimant would have no real chance of proving in court that the personal data in question is inaccurate. The Claimant firmly asserts that the allegations are completely false. It is important to note that the accuracy or inaccuracy of the Memoranda has not been assessed or determined.