Meghan Markle Accused of Stealing $1,695 Gown Worn in New Netflix Promo

The Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle, recently lit up screens for her latest Netflix venture, With Love, Meghan. The festive promotional material was meant to conjure images of warmth and celebration; instead, it only reignited a scandal that has fashion observers raising their perfectly sculptured eyebrows.

Why? Because the emerald gown she chose to wear appears to be a costly souvenir from a previous professional obligation, prompting claims that the Duchess is taking the phrase 'dress for success' a little too literally.

The outfit in question—a stunning $1,695 piece—is now the centre of a fresh wave of allegations regarding items allegedly never returned following a high-profile magazine photo shoot. This is hardly the colour of goodwill the Sussexes were aiming for this holiday season, as the reappearance of the dress has forced a damning, old conversation back into the limelight.

For a royal trying to establish herself as a serious Hollywood producer, the claims are an unwelcome distraction, suggesting a possible failure to follow the organised protocol of high-end fashion loans.

The Emerald Galvan Gown: A Recurring Meghan Markle Controversy

The garment at the centre of the discussion is the emerald green Galvan 'Ushuaia' dress. It is a stunning, sleek garment valued at $1,695, and observers were quick to spot that it was identical to the design Meghan Markle wore for her 2022 Variety magazine cover feature.

This continuity has revived serious allegations of improper conduct following that earlier photo shoot.

According to an exclusive report by Radar Online, the Duchess's choice to re-wear the same dress for the new Netflix campaign has fuelled speculation that she failed to return several items of borrowed designer wardrobe and accessories.

Source of the Allegations

The claims trace back to journalist Vanessa Grigoriadis, who discussed the situation on Andrew Gold's Heretics podcast in March 2024. Grigoriadis claimed she had been informed that Markle did not return 'a lot of stuff' after she 'wore it in a very high-profile photo shoot'.

While loan garments occasionally get misplaced—or an item is purchased and labelled a loan by mistake—Grigoriadis characterised the situation surrounding the Duchess as particularly baffling. The fact that an item, or items, were allegedly not returned is highly unusual in the tightly organised world of celebrity styling and press coverage.

The Montecito Mansion and $100 Million Deals: Fact-Checking the Allegation

The underlying question driving the conversation is one of motive, not just oversight. The Duchess of Sussex and her husband, Prince Harry, famously embarked on a career outside the Royal Family, signing significant deals with streaming giants, including their highly publicised pact with Netflix.

Given this financial freedom, why would she allegedly choose to retain borrowed items?

Grigoriadis highlighted this very point during her podcast appearance, a quotation that has been widely circulated: 'What's shocking about hearing these kinds of alleged stories is that somebody who is living in a 15 million plus mansion in Montecito who's just had had $100 million deals would care enough to take home some jewellery and clothes from a photoshoot that she can clearly afford.'

This commentary frames the whole matter not as a simple clerical error but as an alleged choice. It is important to note that these claims remain unproven, and Meghan Markle herself has made no public comment to address the rumours.

Nonetheless, the scrutiny has overshadowed the launch of the promotional material. What was intended as a promotional launch for With Love, Meghan has instead reopened a critical conversation about her reputation and alleged retention of pricey designer goods without clearing the appropriate paperwork.