Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars

The Duke of Sussex and six other public figures lost a major lawsuit accusing the book’s publisher. Daily Mail illegal information collection

The plaintiffs, including Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, had alleged that Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) carried out or commissioned illegal activities such as tapping landlines, hiring private detectives to plant listening devices inside cars or “spoofing” private recordings.

ANL vehemently denied the allegations at a 45-day high-profile High Court hearing in which Harry and other celebrity plaintiffs gave evidence.

In his 436-page ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all claims brought against ANL, which relate to 57 stories, most of which were published between 1997 and 2015.

The judge said none of the groups could prove their allegations of unlawful collection of information. In civil courts, the burden of proof is lower and claims must be proven on the balance of probabilities to succeed.

In a statement following the decision, ANL said the decisions were “an overwhelming victory for the state”. Daily Mail and for its journalists and the free press in general”.

“As the judgment clearly shows, each article was obtained from legitimate sources,” they said, adding that the case “wasted invaluable court time and more than £50 million in legal fees.”

Prince Harry

The Duke of Sussex claimed 14 articles published by ANL were based on illegal information gathering.

His lawyers said the stories were written between 2001 and 2013 and “focused primarily, in a highly intrusive and damaging way, on the relationships he had established, or rather sought to establish, in the years before he met his current wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.”

Harry, who burst into tears at times during cross-examination that lasted nearly two hours in January, said at the time that he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case “because of the institution I was in.”

He also said in his written statement that “intentionally false” information was added to the stories to disguise illegal methods, including eavesdropping on voicemails, and to “hide my scent.”

ANL argued that Daily Mail And mail on sunday It had offered “a compelling account of the pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”, including previous reports, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies, alongside journalists, friends and “leaker” social circles, press officers and spokespeople.

Mr Justice Nicklin said he accepted the Duke’s evidence and it was clear he wanted the court to understand the “personal impact” of his complaint.

But he found the Crown was “limited in the evidence it can give” on disputed issues.

Baroness Doreen Lawrence

Baroness Doreen Lawrence, whose 18-year-old son Stephen was killed in a notorious racist attack in Eltham, south-east London, in 1993 Daily Mail pretending to support his family.

Under the direction of then editor Paul Dacre, Mail He campaigned to bring Mr Lawrence’s alleged killers to justice. On the front page of its February 14, 1997 issue, the newspaper labeled five men as “murderers” and invited them to sue for libel if they were wrong. Years later, two men were convicted of involvement in the attack and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Baroness Lawrence, who was made a peer in the House of Lords in 2013, was “warned” of a possible legal claim by a message from Harry, the High Court was told. His claim related to five articles published between 1997 and 2007, in which his lawyers claimed he was “extensively targeted” by private detectives and the ANL.

But his claims were rejected and the judge concluded that he had not proven that the journalists had used illegal information gathering to write the stories.

Sir Elton John and David Furnish

Sir Elton John accused the publication of staging an “invasion” of his privacy, while his husband David Furnish accused journalists of being “actively homophobic”.

It was alleged that 10 articles about them, published by ANL between 2002 and 2015, used unlawfully obtained medical information and landline phone tapping, which the publisher vehemently denied.

Giving evidence via video link, Sir Elton said the couple’s claim involved “the most horrific things you can experience in the world in terms of privacy”.

The couple made the claim Daily Mail He had blamed private information about the birth of their son Zachary by surrogate and was disturbed to learn that the newspaper had obtained details of his birth certificate.

Mr Justice Nicklin rejected the argument that this was obtained by deception, finding that there was contemporaneous email evidence supporting ANL’s defense that the details were given to a journalist over the phone by the registration office in Los Angeles.

In his ruling, the judge said: “It is not enough to argue that such a statement is ‘inherently unreasonable’. The court requires evidence, not speculation.”

Sir Simon Hughes

The former Liberal Democrat MP, who represented Bermondsey and Old Southwark for 32 years, told the court he found it “regrettable” that the broadcaster had targeted him using “illegal means” for his “own interests”.

His claim was not related to any published article; instead, it was about alleged illegal information gathering (UIG). mail on sunday journalist.

The qualified lawyer, who was the Liberal Democrat candidate for Mayor of London in 2004 and was elected as the party’s deputy leader in 2010, claimed he became a target of the tabloids after he was exposed as gay. Sun In 2006.

However, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected the claim, concluding that the journalist had failed to prove that he knew that the information in the emails he received was the product of voicemail interception or other illegal information gathering.

Elizabeth Hurley

Ms Hurley’s claim regarding 15 articles Published between 2002 and 2011, in which he alleged that ANL “intentionally exploited my stolen information using its arsenal of illegal means”. Five of them were about his son Damian Hurley and his late father, film producer Steve Bing.

He claimed that private detectives were working Daily Mail He tapped her landline and placed microphones in the windows of her home to hear stories of what she described as “a brutal invasion of privacy.”

Mother of one, best known for her role in the TV series Austin Powers And dazzling He cried many times in his films and while testifying in the case.

Mr Justice Nicklin said he accepted her “clear and direct” evidence but added: “As with each of the plaintiffs, the evidence she can offer on the issues in dispute is limited.”

Sadie Don

In her lawsuit against ANL, Ms Frost claimed her privacy was invaded by phone hacking and tapping of ex-husband Jude Law’s landline while they discussed the details of their divorce settlement.

The applicant’s claim concerned 11 articles and two “chapters” of alleged illegal collection of information for unpublished articles, including one regarding her pregnancy.

While testifying, he claimed that “a price was paid on my head” for the articles published about him. Daily Mail.

former diary editor mail on sunday Katie Nicholl also denied blaming Ms Frost’s medical information for an unpublished story about the actress’s 2003 ectopic pregnancy.

In his ruling, Judge Nicklin said the draft version of the story, which was never published, and the information recorded in the journalist’s notebook were of a “highly private, highly intrusive and highly sensitive medical nature”.

However, he concluded that Ms Frost had failed to prove that the information was obtained from illegal sources. In evidence, Ms Nicholl told the court she had received a tip from a freelance journalist who was “very well sourced”.