At a Glance
- Prince Harry alleges the Daily Mail used unlawful methods to gather information for 20 years.
- The case could involve tens of millions of dollars in damages.
- The High Court trial is expected to last nine weeks.
- Why it matters: The lawsuit highlights ongoing tensions between the British royal family and the press.
Prince Harry has taken the Daily Mail to court in a third and final round of legal battles over alleged privacy violations that span two decades. The Duke of Sussex claims the newspaper and its sister Sunday edition employed private investigators to spy on him and other celebrities, using tactics described by his lawyer as “dark arts.” The case, which also names Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost and others, could bring tens of millions of dollars in damages.
Trial Overview
The High Court hearing in London is slated to run for nine weeks. Harry will testify again on Thursday, marking the second time he has appeared in court since his 2023 testimony, which made him the first senior royal member in over a century to do so. He entered the courtroom in a dark blue suit, waving at reporters as he passed through a side entrance. The proceedings are being watched online by his partner, John.
Claims and Allegations
Attorney David Sherborne said the Daily Mail’s culture of hiring private investigators for “dark arts” has left Harry feeling “distressed and isolated.” He described the intrusions as “terrifying” for Harry’s loved ones and as a “massive strain” on his personal relationships, causing him to become “paranoid beyond belief.” Sherborne also highlighted that the alleged practices involved:
- Bugging cars
- Obtaining personal records
- Eavesdropping on phone calls
Associated Newspapers Ltd. has denied the accusations, calling them preposterous and insisting that the articles were sourced from legitimate “leaky” associates willing to share information.
Defensive Arguments
Defensive counsel Antony White argued that the lawsuits are based on weak inferences, attempting to link articles to payments for investigators. He said witnesses, from editors to reporters, were “lining up” to dispute the allegations and explain their sources, which he described as often being very close to the subjects. White stated:
> “This is in reality little more than guesswork- it involves jumping to conclusions based on insufficient evidence, or worse, artificially selecting and presenting evidence to fit the preconceived agenda.”
White also noted that the claims, dating back to 1993, were filed in 2022– a delay that Judge Matthew Nicklin said would not dismiss the cases but would be reconsidered after hearing evidence.
Key Witnesses and Evidence
Sherborne’s case relies heavily on former private investigator Gavin Burrows, who claimed to have worked for the Mail between 2000 and 2005. Burrows stated that he had completed “hundreds of jobs” for the newspaper, with Harry, Hurley, Frost, Elton John, and David Furnish being “just a small handful of my targets.” However, Burrows later disavowed the statement, asserting he never worked for the Mail.
White contended that without Burrows, many claimants would not have pursued the lawsuit, noting that the “personal watershed moments” of several victims are tied to Burrows’ alleged involvement.
Sherborne countered that Burrows was just one of many private investigators employed by the Daily Mail, describing him as “just the original whistleblower.” He also pointed out that the newspaper’s denials and destruction of records have prevented claimants from learning what was actually done.
Background and Context
The lawsuit is part of Harry’s broader campaign to reform media practices he says contributed to the death of his mother, Princess Diana, in 1997. He has also claimed that persistent press attacks on his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, led the couple to leave royal life and relocate to the United States in 2020.
Harry’s recent reunion with his father, King Charles, has added a personal dimension to the case, suggesting a possible reconciliation between the royal family and the Crown’s stance on media accountability.
Claimants and Defendants
| Claimants | Defendants |
|---|---|
| Prince Harry | Daily Mail & Associated Newspapers Ltd |
| Elton John | |
| Elizabeth Hurley | |
| Sadie Frost | |
| Doreen Lawrence | |
| Simon Hughes |
Timeline of Events
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1993 | Earliest alleged privacy violations begin |
| 2000-2005 | Gavin Burrows claims to have worked for the Mail |
| 2021 | Burrows comes forward with allegations |
| 2022 | Lawsuits filed in High Court |
| 2023 | Harry wins judgment against Daily Mirror and receives damages |
| 2024 | Current High Court trial for Daily Mail |
The case will continue to unfold over the coming weeks, with both sides presenting evidence and witnesses. The outcome could set a precedent for how media outlets handle privacy and investigative practices in the United Kingdom.
Key Takeaways
- The lawsuit alleges two decades of unlawful information gathering by the Daily Mail.
- The trial will last nine weeks and involve high-profile claimants.
- Defenders argue the case is based on weak evidence and delayed filing.
- The outcome may influence future media-royalty relations and press regulation.
