Hermes Vector

EntertainmentTrending

Prince Harry and five others seek to challenge Mail publisher privacy ruling

Prince Harry, Sir Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley are among six claimants applying to appeal the dismissal of their privacy lawsuits against Associated Newspapers.

By Hermes-Vector AI Desk

Also in: Español · Português · Français · 中文

Checked against 2 sourcescp24.comBBC
Illustration for: Prince Harry and five others seek to challenge Mail publisher privacy ruling

In brief

  • Prince Harry and five others are applying to appeal the dismissal of their privacy lawsuits against Associated Newspapers.
  • The High Court dismissed all allegations of unlawful information gathering in July after an 11-week trial.
  • The claimants face joint legal costs of up to £34.5m and were ordered to pay an initial £9.54m.
  • The group includes Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, David Furnish, Sadie Frost and Baroness Lawrence.

Prince Harry and five others seek to challenge Mail publisher privacy ruling

Prince Harry and five other high-profile figures are seeking to challenge the High Court ruling that dismissed their privacy lawsuits against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday.

The claimants

The group includes Prince Harry, singer Sir Elton John, actress Elizabeth Hurley, Sir Elton's husband David Furnish, actress Sadie Frost and political campaigner Baroness Lawrence. They filed applications with the Court of Appeal on Friday to challenge the judgements.

The original ruling

In July, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all the allegations of unlawful information gathering after an 11-week trial in London. Associated Newspapers Limited strongly denied the claims, and a spokesperson for the publisher described the judgement as an "overwhelming victory for the Daily Mail and its journalists".

The claimants had alleged that journalists working for the titles commissioned private investigators to commit a series of unlawful acts between 1993 and 2011. Prince Harry testified in person and claimed the details that appeared in 14 articles about him "plainly" proved journalists were listening in to phone calls, but the judge said he had failed to prove that.

Costs order

The claimants are also challenging a subsequent indemnity costs order. They face paying joint legal costs of up to £34.5m. Mr Justice Nicklin ordered the claimants to make an initial payment of £9.54m while the final total was calculated.

A spokesperson for the group said: "The claimants respectfully disagree with those unprecedented decisions, which they consider to be legally and factually flawed."

The statement did not reference Liberal Democrat politician Sir Simon Hughes, who was part of the action. The BBC has contacted Sir Simon to establish whether he is joining the appeal. After the costs ruling, he told the BBC he was "disappointed" and would take "the time necessary to consider both the substantive and the costs judgment and whether to pursue appeals against decisions in either judgment or both".

There was no comment from a spokesperson for Harry or Associated Newspapers.

Why it matters

The appeal would revive one of the highest-profile privacy battles between public figures and the British press, with potentially tens of millions of pounds in legal costs at stake.


Sources

This article was drafted with AI assistance and checked against the sources above. Company claims are reported as claims. Cover image is AI-generated.

Questions readers ask

Who is challenging the High Court ruling regarding privacy lawsuits against the Daily Mail publisher?
Prince Harry and five other high-profile figures, including Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, David Furnish, Sadie Frost, and Baroness Lawrence, are seeking to challenge the ruling.
What was the outcome of the original trial in July?
Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all allegations of unlawful information gathering after an 11-week trial in London.
What are the claimants facing regarding legal costs?
The claimants face paying joint legal costs of up to £34.5m and were ordered to make an initial payment of £9.54m while the final total is calculated.
What period did the claimants allege unlawful acts by journalists occurred?
The claimants alleged that journalists commissioned private investigators to commit unlawful acts between 1993 and 2011.
Why does this appeal matter?
The appeal would revive one of the highest-profile privacy battles between public figures and the British press, with potentially tens of millions of pounds in legal costs at stake.

The day's checked news, by email

One short email a day with the top stories. Free, and you can unsubscribe in one click.

Or follow for the latest news:

Advertisement

How do you feel about this story?

Comments 0

No comments yet. Start the discussion.