Prince Harry loses High Court case against Daily Mail publisher

Prince Harry claims over alleged unlawful information gathering by Daily Mail publisher, Associated Newspapers, have been dismissed by a High Court judge.

Harry's claims, along with six other defendants, have been dismissed after the claimants failed to prove the allegations.

Associated Newspapers has said that the High Court ruling is an 'overwhelming victory' and a 'magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism'.

The Duke of Sussex, 41, arrived in the UK on Monday evening (6 July), so he was in the country when he found out the verdict.

For those who aren’t up to date on the case, an 11-week trial took place earlier this year following his claim against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over alleged unlawful information gathering.

Harry was among a group of household names and celebrities, including Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish, who alleged acts including voicemail interception, landline tapping and obtaining information by deception - also known as ‘blagging,’ carried out by private investigators, freelance journalists and ANL staff.

ANL strongly denies the claims and defended the case, saying it ‘has established a complete defence to all parts of the claims on the merits’ and that the cases have been brought too late.

The trial took place in London earlier this year (GENYA SAVILOV/Getty Images)

During the London trial, dozens of people gave evidence, including Liz Hurley, Sadie Frost, and Sir Simon Hughes, as well as current or former ANL journalists and executives.

During around two hours of cross-examination in January, the royal said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time ‘because of the institution I was in’.

He also claimed in his written evidence that ‘knowingly false’ information was added to stories to ‘put me off the scent’ to conceal unlawful methods, including voicemail interception.

As part of its defence, ANL said that Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists provide a ‘compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles’, including friends and ‘leaky’ social circles, press officers and spokespersons, as well as previous reporting, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies.

The trial also heard arguments over whether the cases were brought in time, as the law states that legal action related to unlawful information-gathering must be launched within six years of someone discovering they could have a claim.

The verdict comes amid Harry’s trip across the pond, with the Duke in the UK for five days to celebrate the one-year countdown to the Invictus Games, which will take place in Birmingham next year.

He travelled over to London solo, leaving his wife Meghan Markle, and their two children, Prince Archie, seven, and Princess Lilibet, five, at home in the US, where he’s resided since 2020.

Harry travelled to the English capital on Monday without his wife Meghan Markle and their two children (Asanka Ratnayake/Getty Images)

However, they may still join him elsewhere in the UK for the rest of his trip.

The visit got off to a chaotic start with some confusion over the accommodation arrangements, as Harry’s team initially told the media that he would be staying at Buckingham Palace.

But, shortly after the announcement hit the news, the royal residence confirmed that, actually, this would not be the case, with sources allegedly claiming that he had not formally responded to the offer by the deadline, which was the end of last week.

As reported by PA, his spokesman said on Monday that it was ‘disappointing’ the offer from the King had been ‘withdrawn at the last moment’.

The publication reports that appropriate hospitality and staffing provision was said to be no longer available, with Buckingham Palace also believing the longstanding legal case had complicated the matter, and could compromise the King’s constitutional position.

It is said that while every effort was made to facilitate Harry’s stay, as a courtesy to staff and others involved, the Royal Household requires a minimum level of notice to ensure he could be hosted appropriately at a royal residence.