I just read the DM article. It all sounds very confused/confusing. It's so difficult to work out who is accusing who of what, who is defending which allegation, who is interested in having which allegation proven false or true.
The only part that does make sense is the judge's ruling throwing out various claims for being vague, unsubstantiated, irrelevant (this could be deliberate on the part of the DM as a party in the case). I understand from the select parts the DM has chosen to print of that ruling, that MM (or H&M, whoever is pulling the petitioner's strings) has a general feeling of receiving unfair coverage, and generally felt attacked and targeted. As a result, her complaints in the court case are general, which is why they were thrown out. Her point seems to be that she didn't like the spin certain parts of the media had on her (obviously not talking about the objectively racist stuff that was written, but that doesn't seem to appear in her allegations in this court case - maybe they didn't come from this publisher/defendent).
It also sounds like she felt the RF should have protected her from that negative spin, partly because she, via her wedding, brought in so much money for brand UK.
Bottom line, aside from the specific points relating to the letter which will be argued in court, this case seems to be about the claim that she made in that TV interview in S Africa about expecting things to be fair, if not easy. The case is, basically, "it's not fair". Which is in line with the sources/friends/SussexRoyal IG posts/etc about how she's misunderstood and wants to set the record straight, she's not a bad person, everyone is treating her unfairly.
IMO it's fair enough to object to negative press coverage. There's a real conversation to be had about how the media is capable of spin and manipulation, and the more worrying question of what this or that publisher stands to gain from doing so. In this case we're only talking about a wealthy, privileged woman (arguably one who is capable of managing/manipulating her media image herself, and is now in a tizzy that that image is tarnished - thinking about The Tig and her pre-RF Instagram page). In other cases, it could be something incredibly serious that could jeopardize the entire nation's interests (eg Brexit, government cover-ups, national security etc).
In my opinion, the way H&M have gone about handling this problem of their portrayal in the press has done so much more damage to them than the false reputation itself might have done. This court case is so aggressive and short-sighted, and I think will ultimately prove to be futile. The courts aren't interested in protecting MM's feelings of unfairness. They're there to apply the law, and there's no law saying MM should at all times receive a positive or even fair spin (there are laws on defamation and libel which are different). They're using the wrong tool.
Like the legal filings themselves, and arguably the swift engagement/marriage/hitting the ground running/leaving the RF/setting up a foundation/not setting up a foundation/moving from this home to that home/supporting this cause or that charity - it's all flitting about, shooting from the hip. All emotions and hearts-on-sleeves, and less considered thought and reflection.
It's so Instagram.