Prince Harry and six other well-known figures must pay £9.5 million to the publisher of the Daily Mail in legal fees after losing their High Court privacy case.
The Duke of Sussex, along with Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over allegations of unlawful information-gathering. Mr Justice Nicklin has now ruled on the size of an initial payment the group will make to ANL and how the full costs will be assessed.
Costs ruling follows dismissed claims
The news comes days after it emerged that Harry, his wife Meghan and their children would be moving back to the UK. The couple are to live in a non-royal residence outside London, having already enrolled Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet in British schools.
Questions have been raised over the Sussexes’ finances as decisions about whether taxpayers will foot the bill for their security remain unanswered. The duchess will continue to run her lifestyle brand, As Ever, from their new base.
Publisher's costs exceed £34m
ANL had strongly denied the claims of unlawful information-gathering, which were heard at a trial in London earlier this year. Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all the cases in a judgment last month. The cases returned to the High Court several weeks ago for a two-day hearing over costs, where the court was told ANL’s total costs were more than £34 million.
The group, which also publishes the Mail On Sunday, had asked for more than £9.9 million as an interim payment ahead of future hearings to decide its legal costs in depth. Last month, lawyers for the group of household names, also including David Furnish, Sadie Frost and Sir Simon Hughes, said the interim payment should be just over £7.9 million.
Indemnity basis argued
Mr Justice Nicklin previously said the claimants would need to pay the interim payment on August 28, adding: “They are going to be paying a sum of money that I will confirm in the judgment.”
During the hearing, ANL said the group should pay the total costs on an indemnity rather than a standard basis, which would be more favourable to the publisher in terms of the amount it can recover. However, Nicholas Bacon KC, for the group, said in written submissions that it could be “very significant” if the group of seven had to pay ANL’s costs on this stricter basis and could lead to them being without enough insurance cover.
