The Duke of Sussex has lost his High Court cases against the Daily Mail’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).
During an 11-week trial earlier this year, the High Court in London heard claims brought by Prince Harry and a group of high-profile figures, including Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish, over alleged unlawful information-gathering.
The trial, which concluded at the end of March, saw allegations of voicemail interception, landline tapping and obtaining information by deception – also known as “blagging” – carried out by private investigators, freelance journalists and ANL staff made against the publisher.
ANL strongly denies the claims and defended the case, saying it “has established a complete defence to all parts of the claims on the merits” and that the cases have been brought too late.
Dozens of people gave evidence during the trial in London, including Harry, Liz Hurley, Sadie Frost and Sir Simon Hughes, as well as many current or former ANL journalists and executives.
During around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time “because of the institution I was in”.
He also said in his written evidence that “knowingly false” information was added to stories to “put me off the scent”, to conceal unlawful methods, including voicemail interception.
As part of its defence, ANL said that Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists provide a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”, including friends and “leaky” social circles, press officers and spokespersons, as well as previous reporting, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies.
The trial also heard arguments over whether the cases were brought in time as the law states that legal action related to unlawful information-gathering must be launched within six years of someone discovering they could have a claim.
Tuesday’s ruling comes after Buckingham Palace said Harry will not be staying there during his visit to London this week without his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, and their two children, Archie and Lilibet.
The decision by the Palace was said to have been taken in consultation with the King.
The prince’s team had announced he would be staying at the royal residence during his visit following an invitation to do so. However, the offer was rescinded, with the Palace saying he missed the deadline to confirm.
It is also understood the Palace believes Harry’s legal case had complicated the matter, and could compromise the King’s constitutional position.
A spokesperson for the duke said it is “disappointing” the offer has been withdrawn, “with Tuesday’s judgment in the Associated Newspapers Limited case cited as the reason”.
They added that the Palace had been aware of the timing of the judgment since last Thursday.
The i Paper is part of Harmsworth Media, a publishing division owned by ANL’s parent company DMGT – and has complete editorial independence.
Hence then, the article about prince harry loses high court privacy case against daily mail publisher was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Prince Harry loses High Court privacy case against Daily Mail publisher )
Also on site :
- Man Notices Small Lump on Knee, Then Faces Life-Saving Decision
- US budget slashing risks losing global scientific edge to China
- Jilly Cooper Audible Original ‘A Pressing Engagement’ To Star Rhea Norwood, Corey Mylchreest, Hannah Waddingham, Richard Ayoade, Vivian Oparah & Bessie Carter