Prince Harry has lost his unlawful information-gathering lawsuit against the Daily Mail's publisher, Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), with all claims dismissed. The verdict was delivered by Mr Justice Nicklin in writing on the same day the Duke of Sussex began his week-long visit to the UK for the Invictus Games.
Background of the Case
Prince Harry was one of several high-profile claimants, including Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, who alleged that the Daily Mail had conducted unlawful information gathering. The allegations included voicemail interception, landline tapping, and obtaining information through deception, also known as "blagging," carried out by private investigators, freelance journalists, and ANL staff. The claimants described the alleged actions as causing "violation," "profound betrayal," and "shock and horror."
ANL's Defence
ANL strongly denied the claims and defended the case, asserting that it "has established a complete defence to all parts of the claims on the merits" and that the cases were brought too late. As part of its defence, ANL stated that Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists provided a "compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles," including friends and "leaky" social circles, press officers, spokespersons, previous reporting, freelance journalists, and stories from other newspapers and news agencies.
Prince Harry's Testimony
During cross-examination in January, Prince 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 claimed in written evidence that "knowingly false" information was added to stories to "put me off the scent" and conceal unlawful methods, including voicemail interception. In response to ANL's defence, Harry stated 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."
Impact on Prince Harry's UK Visit
The verdict came shortly after Harry arrived at Chatham House in London for the first in a series of week-long events celebrating the Invictus Games. The visit 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. The Palace said arrangements could not be made because the Sussexes' response to the invitation had arrived too late. A spokesperson for the Sussexes issued a fiery statement, claiming the offer of a Palace stay was "withdrawn." 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."
