Prince Harry has been dealt a fresh blow over his privacy legal battle case after a judge dismissed his and others’ claims against the Daily Mail’s publisher.
As reported by The Sun, Harry, 41, was one of seven claimants seeking damages from Associated Newspapers Limited, which publishes the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday.
The group also included Sir Elton John, actress Elizabeth Hurley and campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence.
They alleged journalists used unlawful methods to gather information. The claims included hiring private investigators, placing listening devices in cars, blagging private records and tapping private phone conversations.
ANL denied the allegations and argued the claims came too late.
In a big ruling on Tuesday, judge Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the allegations. The ruling marked a major setback for Harry and the other claimants.
Why the Prince Harry legal battle flared up again
The Sun said the ruling came just hours after Harry returned to the UK for a five-day trip.
He flew in from Montecito, California. He appeared in London on Tuesday at Chatham House for the first in a series of events linked to the 2027 Invictus Games.
That timing pushed Prince Harry’s legal battle back into the spotlight. Harry has fought several high-profile disputes with parts of the British press.
Prince Harry has brought or joined several legal actions involving UK newspaper publishers.
- He was one of the claimants in the case against Associated Newspapers Limited over alleged unlawful information gathering.
- He has also pursued claims linked to Mirror Group Newspapers over unlawful information gathering.
- He has been involved in litigation concerning News Group Newspapers.
- His cases have focused on allegations including phone hacking, voicemail interception and other unlawful methods of obtaining private information.
During around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time “because of the institution I was in”.
In written evidence, he also claimed “knowingly false” information had been added to stories to “put me off the scent”. He said that concealed unlawful methods, including voicemail interception.
Harry also grew emotional in court. He said the case had been a “horrible experience” for his family.
What this defeat could mean for Harry’s next move
ANL said its journalists could give a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”.
The publisher said those sources included friends, “leaky” social circles, press officers, spokespersons, previous reporting, freelance journalists and reports from other newspapers and agencies.
Associated Newspapers Limited is the publisher named in the case.
- It publishes the Daily Mail.
- It also publishes The Mail on Sunday.
- In court, ANL denied the allegations made by the claimants.
- The publisher argued the claims were brought too late.
Mr Justice Nicklin said in the 436-page ruling: “For the reasons given in this judgment, each of the claimants’ claims is dismissed.”
Associated Newspapers said that the High Court ruling was an “overwhelming victory” and a “magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism”.
Read more: King Charles ‘refuses to be pushed around’ amid Prince Harry’s UK visit