The Duke of Sussex and six other prominent figures are facing a legal bill of up to £50m after losing their case against Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), publisher of the Daily Mail, the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline. The High Court dismissed all claims that the publisher had used unlawful methods to source stories about them, in a ruling that signals an end to new litigation from the phone-hacking scandal era.
In a 436-page written verdict, Mr Justice Nicklin stated that the claimants had not proved any information was obtained unlawfully. The court could not simply infer unlawful sourcing if a legitimate and realistic legal method remained possible. The judge also dismissed suggestions that senior Mail figures, including former editor Paul Dacre, had lied to the Leveson inquiry.
The claimants—which included Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and David Furnish, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost, and Simon Hughes—accused ANL of a “clear, systematic and sustained use of unlawful information-gathering” over several years. They presented 55 articles and three incidents as evidence. However, the court found no credible evidence for allegations of phone hacking, landline tapping, bugging, or corrupt payments to police.
The case was seriously damaged after a key witness, private investigator Gavin Burrows, disowned his witness statement, claiming it was a forgery. The judge concluded Burrows was “comprehensively undermined” and could not rely on his testimony.
ANL described the claims as “lurid” and “preposterous”, stating that all stories were sourced legitimately. The publisher will now seek to recover its costs from the case. A spokesperson called the verdict “an overwhelming victory for the Daily Mail and its journalists, and for a free press generally”.
In a joint statement, Prince Harry and Doreen Lawrence called the verdict a “complete and obvious whitewash”. Paul Dacre, in a video statement, said the case was a “conspiracy” orchestrated by press regulation campaigners to “destroy a paper”.
