The British Supreme Court dismisses the Trump dossier privacy case

The High Court in London decided on Thursday that a lawsuit brought by Donald J. Trump against Christopher Steele, a former British spy who in 2016 compiled a dossier detailing unproven claims about ties between the former president and Russia, would be dismissed.

The lawsuit was filed by Mr. Trump against Orbis Business Intelligence, Mr. Steele's firm. Mr. Steele had compiled the dossier and it was leaked to the press shortly before he was sworn in as president.

In the decisionDelivered virtually Thursday morning, the court ruled that Mr. Trump has “no reasonable grounds to assert a claim for damages or damages, and no realistic prospect of successfully obtaining such a remedy.”

The judge, Karen Steyn, said she had “not made any determination as to the accuracy or inaccuracy” of the dossier, noting that Mr Trump had said the allegations were “completely untrue”.

The British lawsuit came as Trump faces a slew of legal troubles closer to home, facing multiple lawsuits and felony charges as he mounts a new campaign for president.

Last week, it was also found that Trump had defamed writer E. Jean Carroll and ordered her to pay $83.3 million after she accused him of rape decades earlier and he repeatedly attacked her with derisive messages and statements.

Mr Steele was a long-serving member of MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence service, and the dossier, prepared by his private investigative agency after his retirement from the agency, was aimed at investigating Russian attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election.

In the court filing of the London case, Trump's lawyers said he was “forced to explain to his family, friends and colleagues that the embarrassing allegations about his private life were untrue. This was extremely disturbing.” The former president had asked for unspecified damages.

The judge rejected that claim for damages. “In reality, the plaintiff is seeking judicial findings to vindicate his reputation in circumstances where he has been unable to formulate a viable solution that he could realistically obtain, or that would be of any use in itself,” she wrote.