Harry and Meghan did NOT secretly marry three days before the royal wedding:

[Klaralven]

Harry and Meghan did NOT secretly marry three days before the royal wedding: Rules state ceremony needs two witnesses and must be carried out in licenced venue as vicar asks 'are rest of claims BS too'

Meghan Markle did not secretly marry Prince Harry three days before their spectacular Windsor wedding, despite claims in their bombshell Oprah interview.

It had been said the couple and just the Archbishop of Canterbury had been present in a low-key union before the televised ceremony.

But a marriage has to have two witnesses and be solemnised by a member of the clergy in a church or licenced place.

It means the pair exchanging vows in a space outside Kensington Palace was not legally binding and they became man and wife in Windsor days later.

Doubts had already been expressed over whether such a ceremony would have even been legal with one clergyman insisting the Archbishop of Canterbury – who Meghan said had conducted the wedding – should explain.

A spokesman for the Archbishop today said he would not comment on personal or pastoral matters.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9337999/Church-vicar-says-Meghans-claim-Harry-secretly-tied-knot-earlier-easily-verified.html

[Ms. Toad]

1. The Daily Mail is about as reliable

as the National Enquirer. As my UK friends tell me repeatedly.

[Klaralven]

5. Lambeth Palace declines to comment on Sussexes' suggestion that Archbishop married them 'in secret'

THE claim by the Duchess of Sussex that she and the Duke were married “in secret” by the Archbishop of Canterbury, three days before their wedding in St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, in May 2018 (News, 19 May 2018), cannot be true in terms of English marriage law.

...

While showing Oprah some chickens that they had rescued from a factory farm, the Duchess, who is now pregnant with their second child, said: “Three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that, but we called the Archbishop and we just said: ‘Look this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union, between us.’ So the vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury.”

Prince Harry said that it had been “Just the three of us.”

It is common for couples to exchange vows during a wedding rehearsal, or in private, shortly before their wedding day; but this is not recognised as the marriage. In England, a marriage is invalid without two witnesses (in addition to the officiant). In the Church of England, a marriage must also be solemnised by a member of the clergy in a church (or elsewhere — e.g. in hospital, or in a college chapel — by special licence).

https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2021/12-march/news/uk/lambeth-palace-declines-to-comment-on-sussexes-suggestion-that-archbishop-married-them-in-secret-before-windsor-ceremony

The rules of the Church of England appear to be quite straightforward.

[Sanity Claws]

2. So what?

This is not aimed at the OP but the Daily Mail.
The two had a secret ceremony with the Archbishop. Whether it is legally binding or not is irrelevant. They actually held something private, just for themselves.

[Pongo]

3. Interesting.

[Hortensis]

4. An ugly attack from the vicious DAILY MAIL? Posted here?

No one can know about the legality of that ceremony, not from this. But, I can't imagine why anyone here would want to dispute their account about something so personal. Or post anything from from the despicable Daily Mail to push its continued attacks.

One thing we all do know is that British tabloid media engaged in an incredibly vicious and racist hate campaign against her. Because we all saw it even though we weren't looking. It was and is dreadful.

She and he recently, btw, won judgements against 3 separate incidents of libel by the Daily Mail.

[Azathoth]

6. This kind of useless arcanery gives the Catholic Church a run for its money nt

[LizBeth]

7. As far as that sounds, they considered that when they were married. When thy exchanged VOWS.

The article is arguing a legality. Petty.

[Klaralven]

11. If marriage was exchanging vows, there wouldn't have been a big fuss over gay marriage

Marriage is a legal construct, not some spiritual state.

The specific legal requirements differ by jurisdiction, but the UK and US are not so different.

You are really married when everyone signs off on the paperwork.

[LizBeth]

12. I am not gonna argue it and I am not gonna point an accusatory finger.

[Croney]

8. I picture them in yellow slickers on a boat at Niagara Falls.

[paleotn]

9. Yea? So? Point?

[MoonRiver]

10. Who cares?