Meghan Markle's sister Samantha is planning to refile an "even stronger" case against the Duchess of Sussex.
On Friday, Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell dismissed part of Samantha Markle's defamation case against the Duchess of Sussex which related to comments made in the royal biography written by Omid Scobie, Finding Freedom.
However, Samantha Markle's legal team will now put a greater emphasis on statements Meghan Markle made during her bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021.
The judge found that Meghan was expressing an "opinion about her childhood" and relationship with her half-siblings that cannot be disproved, and therefore she was not liable for Finding Freedom's claims.
A Florida judge dismissed part of Samantha Markle's defamation case against Meghan
PA
Samantha Markle’s lawyers said the judge’s ruling was not the end of the case.
Instead, they said the judge had allowed the legal team 14 days to amend their complaint.
Their statement adds: "This upcoming amendment will address certain legal issues that are related to our claims for defamation as it specifically relates to the Oprah interview on CBS."
The statement, written by Samantha’s attorney, Jamie Sasson said: "We vehemently oppose the narrative."
He added that his team "look forward to presenting an even stronger argument for the defamation and losses that our client has had to endure".
It comes as Meghan Markle's husband Prince Harry travelled to the UK to attend a court case against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).
The Duke of Sussex is one of several high-profile individuals to bring claims against ANL for misuse of private information.
None of the claimants, including Prince Harry, were formally required to be at the hearing.
The Duke of Sussex is one of several high-profile individuals to bring claims against ANL for misuse of private information.
PA
ANL, the Daily Mail's publisher, has described the allegations as "preposterous smears".
The preliminary hearing considered legal arguments and a judge will decide whether it will go any further.
In a statement released in October when the legal action was announced, the newspaper group said: "We utterly and unambiguously refute these preposterous smears which appear to be nothing more than a pre-planned and orchestrated attempt to drag the Mail titles into the phone hacking scandal concerning articles up to 30 years old.
"These unsubstantiated and highly defamatory claims - based on no credible evidence - appear to be simply a fishing expedition by claimants and their lawyers, some of whom have already pursued cases elsewhere."