British judge says Prince Harry’s lawsuit against Daily Mail publisher can go to trial

25

A British judge has ruled that the lawsuit filed by Prince Harry, Elton John, and five other public figures against a newspaper publisher, accusing them of employing private detectives and listening devices for unauthorized surveillance, should proceed to a full trial. Judge Matthew Nicklin rejected the publisher’s attempt to have the case dismissed without a trial, stating that the defense had not presented a conclusive argument against the claimants.

The claimants, which include David Furnish (Elton John’s husband) and actors Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost, allege that Associated Newspapers Ltd. unlawfully collected information by using surveillance in homes and cars, recording phone conversations, and employing deceptive tactics to access medical records. Prince Harry, in particular, asserts that the publisher targeted him and his close associates by illegally hacking voicemails, tapping landlines, obtaining detailed phone bills, and accessing the flight information of his then-girlfriend, Chelsy Davy.

Associated Newspapers vehemently denies these allegations and sought to have the case dismissed during hearings in March. Their argument included claims that the allegations, some of which date back to 1993, were brought too late and that the claimants were relying on confidential evidence provided during a 2012 public inquiry into tabloid misconduct, known as the Leveson inquiry.

Judge Nicklin ruled that the claimants cannot base their case on the documents from the 2012 Leveson inquiry, but he allowed the case to proceed because he believes the claims have a legitimate chance of success. He noted that Associated Newspapers had not successfully refuted the claims made by the various claimants.

Additionally, the judge dismissed the publisher’s argument that the claims were outside the statute of limitations, stating that each claimant had a real prospect of demonstrating that the relevant facts regarding unlawful information gathering were concealed from them.

The claimants, which also include anti-racism campaigner Doreen Lawrence and former politician Simon Hughes, have the option to request the government to lift restrictions on using the confidential documents or ask Associated Newspapers to voluntarily provide the evidence. However, the court does not have the authority to order such actions at this stage.

This case is one of several legal actions initiated by Prince Harry in the UK as part of his mission to address issues with the British tabloid press. His decision to take legal action against tabloids is linked to his belief that media intrusion played a role in the death of his mother, Princess Diana, in a car crash in Paris in 1997 while being pursued by paparazzi.

Prince Harry and his wife Meghan cited press intrusion as a reason for stepping back from their royal duties in 2020 and relocating to California.

The judge has scheduled a new hearing in the case for November 21, although no trial date has been set. Prince Harry may be called to testify during the trial, as he unexpectedly attended the March hearings in the Associated Newspapers case, although he did not provide testimony.

In a separate lawsuit, Prince Harry is also suing the publisher of The Sun newspaper alongside actor Hugh Grant, with that case scheduled for an early trial next year.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Lawsuit

More about Lawsuit

• Prince Harry and Elton John’s lawsuit against Daily Mail publisher
• Associated Newspapers Ltd. denies allegations
• Background on the 2012 Leveson inquiry
• Prince Harry’s legal actions against tabloids
• Separate lawsuit involving Prince Harry and The Sun newspaper