Prince Harry and six fellow claimants are pursuing “very substantial” damages from Associated Newspapers following an 11-week High Court battle that reached its closing stages on Monday.
The Duke of Sussex, now 41, alleges that journalists working for the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday hired private investigators to illegally access his voicemail messages.
Legal representatives for the claimants told the court they had successfully established their case against the newspaper publisher.
David Sherborne, acting for the group, stated in written submissions: “Each of the claimants is entitled to a very substantial award of damages to compensate them for wrongs committed.”
Prince Harry and six fellow claimants are pursuing “very substantial” damages from Associated Newspapers following an 11-week High Court battle that reached its closing stages on Monday.
|
PA
The group bringing the action includes recognisable public figures: Baroness Lawrence, the 73-year-old mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, musician Sir Elton John, and actress Liz Hurley.
All seven claimants contend that Associated Newspapers engaged in unlawful information gathering practices to obtain private details about their lives.
The allegations centre on claims that the publisher’s journalists commissioned private detectives to intercept communications and gather confidential information through illegal means.
Associated Newspapers, which owns both the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday titles, firmly rejects these accusations, maintaining that its reporters obtained information through legitimate journalistic methods.
The Duke of Sussex, now 41, alleges that journalists working for the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday hired private investigators to illegally access his voicemail messages.
|
PA
Antony White KC, representing the newspapers, countered that the disputed articles resulted from “ordinary, legitimate journalism” rather than any illicit activity.
He noted that over 40 Associated journalists had been accused of commissioning unlawful hacking, describing them as “respectable, mature, career journalists of good character.”
The likelihood of these individuals both committing illegal acts and subsequently testifying at the High Court was “improbable to vanishing,” he argued.
In written submissions, Mr White characterised the lawsuit as part of a “political campaign” orchestrated by press reform organisation Hacked Off, which he claimed had recruited “national treasures” to generate public sympathy and pressure for reopening the Leveson Inquiry.
A judgment on the case is anticipated later this year.
|
PA
The trial judge Mr Justice Nicklin intervened during proceedings, warning that the claimants’ approach “looks perilously close to reversing the burden of proof.”
He questioned how reporters could reasonably demonstrate they had not employed unlawful methods, particularly for stories published more than two decades ago.
“It is for you to demonstrate that there has been a wrong,” the judge told Mr Sherborne.
Mr White also highlighted that private investigator Gavin Burrows, whose alleged confession formed the basis for recruiting Baroness Lawrence, has since denied ever working for either newspaper.