Full List of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Legal Wins Since Royal Exit

Prince Harry won an apology from an anti-monarchy campaign group yesterday over a complaint about charity funds in his, and Meghan Markle's, latest win.

The couple's former foundation, Sussex Royal, had been accused of mismanaging around £300,000 ($420,000) but was cleared of acting unlawfully following a review by regulator the Charity Commission.

The group, Republic, made its allegations in July last year and at the time Harry threatened the "weight of the law" against the pressure group.

Yesterday, the organization posted an apology to its website acknowledging its claims had been false.

It is the latest in a line of victories for the couple who have been using lawyers to draw a line around their privacy and reputational rights.

"We apologize unreservedly"

The Charity Commission was asked to investigate two payments from Prince William and Kate Middleton's Royal Foundation to Harry and Meghan's organization Sussex Royal.

The transfers were made as part of the break up between the royal brothers, who divided their private offices in 2019.

Republic had claimed the relationship between the royals was being placed above the interests of good causes.

The commission found the payments were all within the rules but noted Sussex Royal had used half its funds on the legal and administrative cost of setting up then closing down the organization in the space of 12 months.

Republic, however, were forced to acknowledge that the allegations it made were baseless.

A statement released on Tuesday read: "We apologize unreservedly to the charities and personally to The Duke of Sussex for our actions and the public damage that has been caused as a result of widely publicized untrue claims."

It added: "On 20 July 2020 we falsely claimed that the transfer of funds from The Royal Foundation to Sussex Royal and to Travalyst was improper and likely to be unlawful.

"We also wrote to the Charity Commission expressing the same points and then widely publicized our letter to the U.K. media without knowing whether what we claimed was true. Our intention was to draw attention to the allegations.

"We did not contact The Royal Foundation and/or Sussex Royal before going to the Charity Commission and to the media, which would have been the appropriate action."

"Playing a Media Game With Real Lives"

Meghan sent her father Thomas Markle a letter begging him to stop speaking to the media in August 2018, which he leaked to the Mail on Sunday the following year.

The duchess then sued on privacy and copyright grounds triggering a high profile lawsuit at London's High Court.

During a rollercoaster year of hearings in 2020, Meghan accuse the newspaper of "playing a media game with real lives."

Private messages to her father were revealed in court documents and her lawyers also conceded she had authorized a person to give information to biography Finding Freedom, which accused Prince William of snobbery.

However, in February Meghan won a resounding victory without a trial when judge Mark Warby ruled the newspaper's case occupied the "shadowland between improbability and unreality."

'An Action Taken Against the Company by the Duchess of Sussex on Behalf of Her Son'

Meghan and Harry forced the liquidation of the U.K. arm of Splash News and sent the U.S. arm into chapter 11 bankruptcy over paparazzi pictures taken in Canada.

Meghan had been walking the dogs with Archie in a sling on her chest in Horth Hill Regional Park, Canada, when the photographer took long lens photos of them.

The pictures ran online in the Daily Mail and other news organizations and the couple sued through the High Court in London.

In December the case against the U.K. arm of Splash was settled after the firm went into administration.

In March the U.S. arm of Splash filed of Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Nevada.

A statement released to Newsweek read: "The decision to take the business into a Chapter 11 process was driven by COVID-19 trading conditions and also by litigation risk, including an action taken against the company by the Duchess of Sussex on behalf of her son.

"If the legal action were to be successful, Splash would be liable to pay her legal bills which are sizeable."

The company said it would continue trading with jobs unaffected and the case against the U.S. arm of Splash remains open at the High Court in London.

'We Were Wrong to Offer These Photographs'

Meghan and Harry sued X17 for taking drone pictures of Archie playing with grandmother Doria Ragland in the private grounds of Tyler Perry's Los Angeles mansion last summer.

The images were printed in German mass market celebrity magazine Bunte and showed the youngster playing on a plastic toy car.

The couple won an apology from the company, which agreed to pay legal costs.

X17 said in a statement: "We apologize to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their son for the distress we have caused.

"We were wrong to offer these photographs and commit to not doing so again."

'All of These Allegations Are False'

Prince Harry sued the Mail on Sunday after it claimed he had not been in touch with the Royal Marines since quitting royal duties.

The duke had been their Captain General until he left Britain for a new life in America.

At the time of the newspaper's allegations, the position had been left vacant pending the end of a first "transition year" of post-royal life.

Ultimately, Queen Elizabeth II stripped Harry of the title but when the Mail on Sunday published the claims there was still a possibility he would reclaim the ceremonial function.

The Mail on Sunday settled the case, conceding Harry had been in touch with marines in a private capacity.

Jenny Afia, Harry's attorney, told the High Court in London: "All of these allegations are false, as the Mail on Sunday and the MailOnline have now accepted, albeit after considerable damage was already done.

"The truth is that The Duke of Sussex has made repeated and concerted efforts to continue to support the Royal Marines and other members of the Armed Forces and their families over the past year, even though he was required to step back from his formal military roles in the 'year of transition' during which he must take a reduced role as a member of the Royal Family."