Prince Harry Scores Major Win in Tabloid Lawsuit

A London judge has ruled that Prince Harry’s lawsuit against British tabloid publisher Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) can proceed to trial in a major legal boost for the royal, who has stated his life’s ambition is to hold the media to account for their actions.

Harry is suing ANL, which publishes the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday titles, alongside a group of six other high profile Brits including Elton John and David Furnish, who claim that stories which ran in the papers between 1993 and 2011 were sourced using unlawful information-gathering techniques.

The group accused ANL of using information sourced through hacking phones, tapping landlines, bugging cars and in one case, illegal trespass.

The publishers firmly denied these allegations and asked the court to grant a summary judgement in their favor, ruling that the claims against them are unable to proceed to trial because the alleged wrongdoings took place over six years before the lawsuit was filed.

Following a landmark legal investigation in 2011 known as the Leveson Inquiry, U.K. courts ruled that people who suspect they have been the victims of unlawful information gathering by the media have six years from the date of the illegal activity to bring a lawsuit.

Harry and the group of co-claimants filed their suit in 2022, arguing that prior to this they had not been sufficiently aware that they had been the victims of any illegal activity by ANL journalists, therefore unaware they could bring a case against them.

Judge Matthew Nicklin ruled on Friday that there was sufficient evidence to suggest that the co-claimants could prove at trial that they had been unaware of their rights to bring a claim against the publisher within a six-year period.

He also said that ANL had “not been able to deliver a ‘knockout blow’ to the claims of any of these claimants.”

This means Harry and the group can proceed to trial with their allegations against ANL, which will no doubt be considered a major win by the royal. He said in his witness statement for the case that “if the most influential newspaper company can successfully evade justice, then in my opinion the whole country is doomed.”

“I love my country and I remain deeply concerned by the unchecked power, influence and criminality of Associated,” he said.

The prince and his co-claimants were dealt one blow by the judge, in that a portion of evidence provided by their legal counsel has been determined as unusable unless further permissions are acquired.

Harry’s legal team had presented data and ledgers from ANL which had been previously provided to the Leveson Inquiry by the publishers themselves, but on the understanding that it would not be made a matter of public record. This was confirmed in a formal order at the time.

Judge Nicklin stated in his ruling on Friday that the information could not be used at trial unless permission was obtained from ministers connected with the inquiry or ANL provided it itself.

Despite this, in a statement on behalf of all seven claimants on Friday, their legal team celebrated the ruling while condemning the publishers.

“We are delighted with today’s decision which allows our claims over serious criminal activity and gross breaches of privacy by the Mail titles to proceed to trial,” it said.

“The High Court has dismissed ‘without difficulty’ the attempt by Associated Newspapers (publisher of The Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday and the Mail Online) to throw these cases out. Indeed, the Judge found that each of our claims had a real prospect of showing there was concealment of unlawful acts by the Mail titles and that this could not have been discovered until recently. Our claims can now proceed to trial.

“As we have maintained since the outset, we bring our claims over the deplorable and illegal activities which took place over many years, including private investigators being hired to place secretly listening devices inside our cars and homes, the tapping of our phone calls, corrupt payments to police for inside information, and the illegal accessing of our medical information from hospitals and financial information from banks.

“We intend to uncover the truth at trial and hold those responsible at Associated Newspapers fully accountable.

“The Judge also found ledgers showing secret payments by The Mail and The Mail on Sunday to private investigators which had been provided to our lawyers and could not be used at this stage without the consent of the newspapers or the Government. This only delays the inevitable since they will have to be produced in the course of the claim by Associated in any event.

“However, if The Mail and The Mail on Sunday have nothing to hide, and they genuinely believe our allegations are unfounded, as they appear to claim, they should provide us with the ledgers voluntarily now, and let the claims proceed to trial as quickly as possible.”

ANL has consistently and strongly denied the claims.

In its own statement issued after the judgement on Friday, ANL said it welcomed the ruling to withhold the Leveson Inquiry material.

“We welcome Mr Justice Nicklin’s decision that the information we and other newspapers supplied to the Leveson Inquiry under strict grounds of confidentiality remains subject to the Restriction Order imposed by Lord Justice Leveson,” it said.

“In a significant victory for justice and the Mail, the Judge ruled that the information should not have been used by the Claimants and must be struck out from the case,” they said.

“As Mr Justice Nicklin says in his judgment, this was an ‘abuse of process’ and if used, ‘it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.’

“As we have always made unequivocally clear, the lurid claims made by Prince Harry and others of phone-hacking, landline-tapping, burglary and sticky-window microphones are simply preposterous and we look forward to establishing this in court in due course.

“We are grateful to the judge for the careful consideration he has given to our applications.”

No date for the trial has yet been set.

The prince is currently suing two other major tabloid publishers in Britain over similar claims of unlawful information gathering. In June he became the first senior royal in over a century to appear in court to give evidence in his lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers.

Regalrumination.com approached representatives of Associated Newspapers Limited and Prince Harry via email for comment.

James Crawford-Smith is Regalrumination.com‘s royal reporter, based in London. You can find him on X (formerly Twitter) at @jrcrawfordsmith and read his stories on Regalrumination.com‘s The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email Support@regalrumination.com. We’d love to hear from you.

A London judge has ruled that Prince Harry’s lawsuit against British tabloid publisher Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) can proceed to trial in a major legal boost for the royal, who has stated his life’s ambition is to hold the media to account for their actions.

Harry is suing ANL, which publishes the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday titles, alongside a group of six other high profile Brits including Elton John and David Furnish, who claim that stories which ran in the papers between 1993 and 2011 were sourced using unlawful information-gathering techniques.

The group accused ANL of using information sourced through hacking phones, tapping landlines, bugging cars and in one case, illegal trespass.

The publishers firmly denied these allegations and asked the court to grant a summary judgement in their favor, ruling that the claims against them are unable to proceed to trial because the alleged wrongdoings took place over six years before the lawsuit was filed.

Following a landmark legal investigation in 2011 known as the Leveson Inquiry, U.K. courts ruled that people who suspect they have been the victims of unlawful information gathering by the media have six years from the date of the illegal activity to bring a lawsuit.

Harry and the group of co-claimants filed their suit in 2022, arguing that prior to this they had not been sufficiently aware that they had been the victims of any illegal activity by ANL journalists, therefore unaware they could bring a case against them.

Judge Matthew Nicklin ruled on Friday that there was sufficient evidence to suggest that the co-claimants could prove at trial that they had been unaware of their rights to bring a claim against the publisher within a six-year period.

He also said that ANL had “not been able to deliver a ‘knockout blow’ to the claims of any of these claimants.”

This means Harry and the group can proceed to trial with their allegations against ANL, which will no doubt be considered a major win by the royal. He said in his witness statement for the case that “if the most influential newspaper company can successfully evade justice, then in my opinion the whole country is doomed.”

“I love my country and I remain deeply concerned by the unchecked power, influence and criminality of Associated,” he said.

The prince and his co-claimants were dealt one blow by the judge, in that a portion of evidence provided by their legal counsel has been determined as unusable unless further permissions are acquired.

Harry’s legal team had presented data and ledgers from ANL which had been previously provided to the Leveson Inquiry by the publishers themselves, but on the understanding that it would not be made a matter of public record. This was confirmed in a formal order at the time.

Judge Nicklin stated in his ruling on Friday that the information could not be used at trial unless permission was obtained from ministers connected with the inquiry or ANL provided it itself.

Despite this, in a statement on behalf of all seven claimants on Friday, their legal team celebrated the ruling while condemning the publishers.

“We are delighted with today’s decision which allows our claims over serious criminal activity and gross breaches of privacy by the Mail titles to proceed to trial,” it said.

“The High Court has dismissed ‘without difficulty’ the attempt by Associated Newspapers (publisher of The Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday and the Mail Online) to throw these cases out. Indeed, the Judge found that each of our claims had a real prospect of showing there was concealment of unlawful acts by the Mail titles and that this could not have been discovered until recently. Our claims can now proceed to trial.

“As we have maintained since the outset, we bring our claims over the deplorable and illegal activities which took place over many years, including private investigators being hired to place secretly listening devices inside our cars and homes, the tapping of our phone calls, corrupt payments to police for inside information, and the illegal accessing of our medical information from hospitals and financial information from banks.

“We intend to uncover the truth at trial and hold those responsible at Associated Newspapers fully accountable.

“The Judge also found ledgers showing secret payments by The Mail and The Mail on Sunday to private investigators which had been provided to our lawyers and could not be used at this stage without the consent of the newspapers or the Government. This only delays the inevitable since they will have to be produced in the course of the claim by Associated in any event.

“However, if The Mail and The Mail on Sunday have nothing to hide, and they genuinely believe our allegations are unfounded, as they appear to claim, they should provide us with the ledgers voluntarily now, and let the claims proceed to trial as quickly as possible.”

ANL has consistently and strongly denied the claims.

In its own statement issued after the judgement on Friday, ANL said it welcomed the ruling to withhold the Leveson Inquiry material.

“We welcome Mr Justice Nicklin’s decision that the information we and other newspapers supplied to the Leveson Inquiry under strict grounds of confidentiality remains subject to the Restriction Order imposed by Lord Justice Leveson,” it said.

“In a significant victory for justice and the Mail, the Judge ruled that the information should not have been used by the Claimants and must be struck out from the case,” they said.

“As Mr Justice Nicklin says in his judgment, this was an ‘abuse of process’ and if used, ‘it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.’

“As we have always made unequivocally clear, the lurid claims made by Prince Harry and others of phone-hacking, landline-tapping, burglary and sticky-window microphones are simply preposterous and we look forward to establishing this in court in due course.

“We are grateful to the judge for the careful consideration he has given to our applications.”

No date for the trial has yet been set.

The prince is currently suing two other major tabloid publishers in Britain over similar claims of unlawful information gathering. In June he became the first senior royal in over a century to appear in court to give evidence in his lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers.

Regalrumination.com approached representatives of Associated Newspapers Limited and Prince Harry via email for comment.

James Crawford-Smith is Regalrumination.com‘s royal reporter, based in London. You can find him on X (formerly Twitter) at @jrcrawfordsmith and read his stories on Regalrumination.com‘s The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email Support@regalrumination.com. We’d love to hear from you.