Prince Harry returns to London’s High Court on Monday for the last chapter of his three-year campaign against Britain’s tabloid industry, a nine-week trial that could end with multi-million-pound damages and a landmark ruling on privacy invasion.
At a Glance
- Harry leads seven high-profile claimants suing Associated Newspapers Ltd., publisher of the Daily Mail, over alleged car-bugging, medical-record snooping and phone eavesdropping.
- The Duke blames the press for Princess Diana’s death and for the abuse he says forced him and Meghan to quit royal life in 2020.
- King Charles III will be in Scotland during the opening days, making a father-son reunion unlikely.
Why it matters: The outcome will set a legal precedent for how far British media can be forced to pay for decades of covert surveillance.
The case, filed in 2022, is the biggest remaining slice of the phone-hacking scandal that began around the turn of the century. Harry, Elton John, David Furnish, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost, anti-racism campaigner Doreen Lawrence and former MP Simon Hughes claim Associated hired private investigators to spy on them for splashy exclusives.
Prince vs Publisher
Associated has called the allegations “preposterous” and denies any unlawful activity. The trial will be Harry’s second time in the witness box after he made royal history in 2023 by testifying against Mirror Group Newspapers, winning a judgment that condemned “widespread and habitual” phone hacking. Last year Rupert Murdoch’s News UK issued an unprecedented apology to Harry and paid substantial damages to settle a separate privacy suit.
Harry’s lawyers say his media reform mission is personal: he holds the press responsible for the 1997 Paris car crash that killed Diana and for the barrage of stories that he claims drove the Sussexes from Britain.
Ruling Reversals
Both sides have claimed victories in pretrial skirmishes:
- Judge Matthew Nicklin refused to throw the case out, ruling the claims have a “real prospect of succeeding” despite dating back to 1993.
- The same judge blocked the claimants from using leaked government documents that showed payments to private investigators, calling them confidential material from the official phone-hacking inquiry.
- Whitehall later granted Harry permission to use the records, restoring a key plank of evidence.
Witness Flip-Flop
A dramatic twist emerged when private investigator Gavin Burrows, whose sworn statement backed the celebrities, filed a second statement denying he ever worked unlawfully for Associated. Barrister David Sherborne told the court Burrows originally admitted “hundreds of jobs” for the Mail between 2000 and 2005 and named Harry, John and Hurley among his targets. The impact of his conflicting evidence remains unclear.
Family Freeze-Out
The trial’s timing underscores the ongoing frost between Harry and the royal family. After burning bridges with the memoir Spare and a Netflix docuseries, Harry managed only a brief tea with Charles last autumn. With the King heading to Scotland as proceedings open, palace insiders say a repeat meeting is unlikely during this visit.
The Duke is expected to give evidence in the first fortnight before flying back to California, leaving lawyers to battle over whether Britain’s most aggressive tabloid will finally face a financial reckoning.
