Prince Harry has phone hacking case against Daily Mail dismissed by High Court

The Duke of Sussex’s claims over alleged unlawful information gathering by Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers have been dismissed by a High Court judge.

The case brought by Prince Harry, Sir Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley, was heard at a three-month trial at London’s High Court at the beginning of this year.

The trial judge, Mr Justice Nicklin, accepted that every article complained about was lawfully sourced.

The claim was brought against publisher Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday.

In his written judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin discussed each of the articles in the now-dismissed claims brought by Harry and the other household names.

Discussing one of the duke’s articles, about Harry being named as the godfather to the child of his former nanny, Tiggy Legge-Bourke, Mr Justice Nicklin said: ‘The burden is on Prince Harry to prove that the information he relies upon in this article was obtained by unlawful means carried out or commissioned on Associated’s behalf.

‘The allegation, advanced at trial, was that it was obtained by voicemail interception.

‘I am not satisfied that this has been established. The pleaded case does not particularise any unlawful act used to obtain the information in this article.”

The judge continued: ‘More importantly, the evidence available for this article does not provide a sufficient foundation to conclude that voicemail interception, or any other unlawful act, occurred to obtain the relevant information.

‘There is no documentary evidence for this article pointing to or suggesting voicemail interception.’

He added: “Prince Harry’s evidence is that only a very close circle would have known these matters and that the Palace press office would not have known because Prince Charles had not yet been notified.

‘That evidence is important, and I take it into account. But it does not, without more, establish that the information was obtained through voicemail interception, still less that it was obtained by, or as the product of, an unlawful act carried out or commissioned on Associated’s behalf.’

An Associated Newspapers Ltd spokesman said: ‘Associated Newspapers welcomes today’s judgement, which is an overwhelming victory for the Daily Mail and its journalists, and for a free press generally.

‘Mr Justice Nicklin today cleared the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday, and dismissed every single one of the 97 allegations made by the claimants. In every case, the Judge accepted the honesty of our journalists’ evidence on how they sourced their stories.

‘This is a magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism.

‘For some of the most outrageous allegations made when the case was launched in a blaze of publicity four years ago – placing bugs in people’s cars and homes, listening to calls as they were made and illicitly accessing bank accounts – no credible evidence was ever presented.

‘As we said at the time, these allegations were “lurid” and “preposterous”, and were a fishing expedition by the claimants and their legal teams in a politically motivated campaign to muzzle the free press.

‘The reputations of our decent and hard-working journalists were terribly impugned, and today they have been exonerated.

‘As the judgement clearly shows, every single article was legitimately sourced.

‘Associated Newspapers thanks Mr Justice Nicklin for the patience and wisdom he has displayed throughout this misguided legal action, which has wasted so much valuable court time and more than £50m in legal costs.

‘We will look to resolve outstanding issues, including the recovery of the costs we have incurred while defending ourselves against this egregious litigation.’