The Duke of Sussex was one of several high-profile claimants.
Prince Harry was seen moments before the verdict was issued (Image: Getty)
Prince Harry has lost his unlawful information-gathering lawsuit against the Daily Mail’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), it was announced today. The trial came to an end in March, with Mr Justice Nicklin delivering his verdict in writing the same day that the Duke of Sussex began his week-long visit to the UK for the Invictus Games.
It is understood that each of the Duke’s 14 claims for different articles has been dismissed. The other high-profile claimants, including Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, have also seen their claims dismissed by the High Court.
The verdict, which Harry is understood to have learnt earlier today, came shortly after the Duke arrived at Chatham House in London for the first in a series of week-long events celebrating the Games.
Alongside other claimants, Prince Harry alleged the paper had conducted unlawful information gathering, from landline tapping to obtaining information through deception, the claimants had suffered “violation”, “profound betrayal” and “shock and horror”, the court heard.
Prince Harry gave evidence in High Court (Image: Getty)
These include allegations of 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.
During the lengthy 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”.
He also said 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.
Prince Harry pictured leaving High Court earlier this year (Image: Getty)
In response to the claims, Harry said in court: “My social circles were not leaky, I want to make that absolutely clear.” He added that if he became suspicious of someone, “I would have to cut contact with this person”.
The verdict comes one day after the beginning of Harry’s visit to the UK, which was overshadowed by a confusing back-and-forth over whether the Duke would stay at Buckingham Palace during the London leg of his visit.
It was reported on Monday morning that Prince Harry had accepted an offer; however, this claim was quickly denied. It soon became clear that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s response to the invitation had arrived too late, and as a result, the Palace said arrangements could not be made.
They said: “I am aware of multiple briefings from Buckingham Palace last week suggesting that the Duke had not accepted the offer of accommodation at a Royal Residence.
“Following RAVEC’s decision not to provide security for his family, the Duke spent last week making alternative security arrangements. Once those arrangements were in place, he was able to formally accept the offer of accommodation for himself over the weekend.
“It is therefore disappointing that the offer has now been withdrawn, with Tuesday’s judgment in the Associated Newspapers Limited case cited as the reason. Buckingham Palace has, however, been aware of that judgment since last Thursday. It is therefore unclear why, having formally accepted the accommodation offer, it has now been withdrawn at the last moment.”
