- Prince Harry and six other claimants lose privacy case against Associated Newspapers.
- Court finds no evidence to support allegations of widespread unlawful reporting.
- Ruling marks a significant legal victory for the Daily Mail publisher.
Prince Harry's privacy case against Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Daily Mail, has ended in defeat after a UK High Court judge ruled there was not enough evidence to support claims that journalists routinely used unlawful methods to obtain private information.
The ruling is a major victory for Associated Newspapers and brings to a close one of the Duke of Sussex's longest-running legal battles against the British tabloid press. The judgment was delivered remotely while Prince Harry was in London for engagements linked to the Invictus Games.
Justice Matthew Nicklin dismissed the claims brought by Prince Harry and six other high-profile claimants, including singer Elton John, actor Elizabeth Hurley, actor Sadie Frost, anti-racism campaigner Doreen Lawrence, former politician Simon Hughes and filmmaker David Furnish.
According to reports, the judge ruled that Prince Harry had failed to prove the newspaper publisher relied on unlawful information-gathering techniques. In a summary of the more than 400-page judgment, Justice Nicklin reportedly said serious allegations require strong evidence and cannot be based on suspicion alone.
The judge also reportedly accepted explanations from Associated Newspapers journalists about how several of the disputed stories had been sourced and declined to conclude that unlawful information gathering was widespread or routine within the organisation.
Another chapter in Harry's battle with the tabloids
The lawsuit sought substantial damages over claims that journalists had obtained private information through unlawful methods, including the use of private investigators. Associated Newspapers consistently denied the allegations, arguing the articles relied on legitimate sources such as friends, royal aides, publicists and other contacts.
The company described the ruling as an "overwhelming victory" and a "magnificent vindication" of its journalism, reportedly saying its journalists had been fully exonerated.
The case is estimated to have generated legal costs of around £40 million.
The judgment adds another chapter to Prince Harry's long-running campaign against sections of the British tabloid press. While he secured a victory against the publisher of the Daily Mirror in 2023 over unlawful phone hacking and later reached a settlement with the publisher of The Sun, this latest ruling represents a significant setback in his wider legal efforts.
Prince Harry has previously said his decision to pursue legal action against newspaper publishers contributed to tensions within the Royal Family. He has also repeatedly argued that media intrusion affected both his late mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, and his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, ultimately influencing the couple's decision to step back from royal duties and relocate to the US in 2020.
