High Court Dismisses Phone-Hacking Claims Against Daily Mail Publisher
Prince Harry and six other high-profile individuals have lost their legal battle against Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), the publisher of the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, and MailOnline. The high court dismissed all claims that the newspaper group had used unlawful methods to gather information over two decades. The ruling, delivered by Mr Justice Nicklin, stated that the claimants failed to prove that any information was obtained illegally.
Potential £50m Legal Bill for Claimants
ANL is expected to seek recovery of its legal costs, which could leave the claimants facing a bill of up to £50m. The 436-page verdict emphasized that the court could not infer unlawful sourcing if a legitimate method existed. The judge also rejected allegations that senior Mail figures, including former editor Paul Dacre, had misled the Leveson inquiry into press ethics.
Claimants Included Prince Harry, Elton John, and Doreen Lawrence
The group of seven claimants also included Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish, actress Elizabeth Hurley, actress Sadie Frost, Doreen Lawrence (mother of Stephen Lawrence), and former Liberal Democrat minister Simon Hughes. They presented 55 articles published between 1997 and 2015, along with three unpublished incidents, as evidence of unlawful information-gathering.
Publisher Celebrates 'Overwhelming Victory'
ANL described the verdict as an overwhelming victory for the Daily Mail and a free press. A spokesperson stated: 'This is a magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism. For some of the most outrageous allegations made when the case was launched in a blaze of publicity four years ago – placing bugs in people’s cars and homes, listening to calls as they were made and illicitly accessing bank accounts – no credible evidence was ever presented.' The spokesperson added that the reputations of their journalists had been 'terribly impugned' and 'today they have been exonerated.'
Key Witness Discredited
The claimants' case suffered a significant blow when key witness Gavin Burrows, a private investigator, claimed his witness statement was a forgery and denied carrying out illegal activities for the Mail titles. The judge found Burrows 'comprehensively undermined' as a witness, with no independent corroboration for his claims.
Prince Harry's Broader Legal Campaign
Prince Harry has been at the forefront of legal actions against British newspapers. He previously won substantial damages from the Daily Mirror in a phone-hacking case and settled a lawsuit against News Group Newspapers, publisher of The Sun, last year. However, the Mail case resulted in no admissions of wrongdoing from ANL, which defended all claims as legitimate journalism.
Impact on Phone-Hacking Litigation
The ruling is expected to mark the end of new litigation related to the phone-hacking scandal era. Newspapers have paid millions in settlements since the Guardian exposed the scandal in 2011, leading to the closure of the News of the World and the Leveson inquiry. The claimants' lawyers argued that missing documents from the period hampered their case, with invoices and emails deleted or destroyed.
