Piers Morgan has publicly ridiculed Prince Harry after the Duke of Sussex lost his high-profile privacy lawsuit against Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), the publisher of the Daily Mail. The case, which involved 14 separate claims by Harry, was dismissed in its entirety by the High Court on Tuesday, July 7, 2026.
Piers Morgan's Brutal Seven-Word Message
Morgan, a former Good Morning Britain presenter and long-time critic of the Sussexes, took to X to deliver a scathing response. He wrote: "Devastated about Prince Harry’s £50m High Court defeat to the Daily Mail. I do hope it doesn’t bankrupt him," followed by a crying emoji. The post quickly went viral, drawing both support and criticism.
In a follow-up message, Morgan accused Harry and other celebrity claimants of hypocrisy. He posted: "Massive win for the Mail, massive defeat for the Ginger Whinger and the other celebrities involved who love to use the media when it suits them. How delicious that he’s come back to UK just in time to be humiliated. Expect the mother of all tantrums later…"
Details of the Lawsuit
The Duke of Sussex was among several high-profile figures—including Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, and Baroness Doreen Lawrence—who sued ANL over alleged unlawful activities. The claimants accused the publisher of hiring private investigators to plant listening devices in cars, "blagging" private records, and accessing private phone conversations. However, the High Court dismissed all claims, ruling that they were not supported by evidence.
According to court documents, Harry's 14 claims for different articles were all rejected. The judgment marks a significant legal defeat for the prince, who has been engaged in multiple legal battles against the British press.
Timing of the Defeat
The ruling came just one day after Prince Harry arrived in the UK to mark the one-year countdown to the 2027 Invictus Games. Originally, his wife Meghan Markle and their two children were expected to join him, but Harry decided against it after his request for taxpayer-funded security was denied by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC).
It was also reported that Harry had accepted an offer to stay at Buckingham Palace during his visit, but the offer was later withdrawn. A spokesperson for the couple 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."
Reactions and Impact
The defeat has been widely seen as a blow to Harry's ongoing campaign against press intrusion. Morgan's comments reflect a broader sentiment among some critics who view the prince's legal actions as hypocritical, given his own use of media platforms. Meanwhile, supporters of Harry argue that the case highlights systemic issues in British tabloid journalism.
The other celebrity claimants have not publicly commented on the ruling, but sources indicate they are considering an appeal. The case has also reignited debate about privacy laws and the role of the press in the UK.
