Donald Trump's lawyers have said in a new US court filing that aspects of the BBC's defence against his multi-billion-dollar defamation lawsuit contain "untenable", "misplaced", and "unpersuasive" arguments.

The U.S. president is suing the BBC over the editing of his 6 January 2021 speech in a Panorama documentary.

Last month, the BBC asked the Florida court to delay discovery, the process by which each side provides the other with relevant documents and evidence.

The corporation argued that, because it intends to move to dismiss the case by 17 March, discovery should be delayed until the court rules on that issue. But Trump's team said on Monday that they disagreed.

The president's lawyers argued that the Florida court "has established a high burden for granting a motion to stay discovery", adding that it would be "premature" to delay.

They said: "In short, defendants' merits arguments amount to just denials, disputes, and predictions about what plaintiff will or will not prove later.

"That is not a 'clear indication' that the complaint must be dismissed in its entirety with prejudice, and provides no basis to impose the extraordinary remedy of a discovery stay."

Court papers filed earlier this month by the BBC show that the broadcaster will argue that the Florida court lacks "personal jurisdiction" over it, that the venue is "improper", and that Trump has "failed to state a claim".

But in Trump's filing on Monday, his team maintained its argument that Floridians had access to the BBC programme Trump: A Second Chance?, which was broadcast in the UK just before the 2024 presidential election.

A BBC spokesperson said: "As we have made clear previously, we will be defending this case. We will not make further comments regarding ongoing legal proceedings.

"The court documentation is available online, and we won't be adding further to what is said in these documents at this stage."

The BBC previously apologised to Trump over the Panorama edit, but rejected his demands for compensation and disagreed that there was a basis for a defamation and trade practices claim.

A proposed trial date in 2027 has been indicated, should the case progress.