{"id":77978,"date":"2026-07-06T23:33:24","date_gmt":"2026-07-06T23:33:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/77978\/"},"modified":"2026-07-06T23:33:24","modified_gmt":"2026-07-06T23:33:24","slug":"up-to-38m-legal-costs-4-year-wait-and-14-news-articles-harrys-court-battle-with-daily-mail-publisher-in-numbers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/77978\/","title":{"rendered":"Up to \u00a338m legal costs, 4-year wait and 14 news articles: Harry\u2019s court battle with Daily Mail publisher in numbers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Your support helps us to tell the story<\/p>\n

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.<\/p>\n

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.<\/p>\n

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.<\/p>\n

Your support makes all the difference.Read more<\/p>\n

In a defining moment of his evidence to the High Court, Prince Harry appeared, briefly, to slip under the weight of emotion.<\/p>\n

Before making claims over \u201c24-hour surveillance\u201d and \u201cpeople write about you claiming it is in the public interest when it clearly isn\u2019t\u201d, the Duke of Sussex<\/a> was told by judge Mr Justice Nicklin that, as a witness<\/a>, he did not have to argue his point; he just had to answer the questions put to him.<\/p>\n

Harry said: \u201cI just want you to have an idea of what it is like living in this world.\u201d <\/p>\n

For 45 days, the Royal Courts of Justice<\/a> hosted a trial which heard claims by Harry<\/a> and six other household names, including Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, against the Daily Mail<\/a>\u2019s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).<\/p>\n

Alleging unlawful information gathering, from landline tapping to obtaining information through deception, the claimants had suffered \u201cviolation\u201d, \u201cprofound betrayal\u201d and \u201cshock and horror\u201d, the court heard.<\/p>\n

But it was Prince Harry, in his third legal dispute with a newspaper group, who caught most of the media attention<\/a>, as he shed light on his relationships under the tabloid spotlight during a two-hour exchange with lawyers acting on behalf of ANL.<\/p>\n

\"PrincePrince Harry reacts as he walks outside the High Court, during the first week of the trial earlier this year (Reuters)<\/p>\n

ANL strongly denied the claims<\/a>, saying it had a \u201cculture of professionalism and discipline\u201d. Antony White KC said the group\u2019s claim had been conceived by press reform campaign group Hacked Off, as a \u201cpolitical campaign\u201d, and that the publisher had mounted a \u201crobust and comprehensive\u201d defence. <\/p>\n

The stakes for both sides are high as Mr Justice Nicklin hands down his ruling on Tuesday. Here, The Independent looks at the case by numbers:<\/p>\n

Two hours: Harry faces questions<\/p>\n

As the Duke of Sussex took to the witness stand, laughter rippled through the courtroom when he admitted not being able to remember how he was referred to the last time he was in court \u2013 but by the end of the session, Harry was close to tears.<\/p>\n

Answering questions from barrister David Sherborne, for the group suing ANL, Harry said: \u201cThey continue to come after me, they have made my wife\u2019s life an absolute misery, my Lord.\u201d <\/p>\n

Dressed in a dark suit and striped tie, Harry spent around two hours in the witness box, swearing an oath on the Bible before he started giving evidence. Taking notes and asking for hard copies of news articles that he was being questioned about, he said he did not have \u201cleaky\u201d social circles.<\/p>\n

He said: \u201cWhen you are in a situation like this, the moment something private is out, your circle of trust and knowledge decreases over time.\u201d He added: \u201cThe stuff in these articles is not the kind of stuff I would talk about openly.\u201d<\/p>\n

Harry also claimed he was \u201cforced\u201d to work with reporters and said it was \u201cbeyond cruel\u201d to publish an article about \u201cconfidential discussions\u201d he had after a photo of a dying Diana was published in the Italian press.<\/p>\n

\"TheThe press turned out in force for the appearance of Harry at the Royal Courts of Justice (AFP\/Getty)<\/p>\n

In his written evidence, Harry described an article published in the Daily Mail in July 2006 as \u201creally disgusting\u201d, saying he was having private discussions with his brother, the now-Prince of Wales. <\/p>\n

On the witness stand, he said: \u201cThe amount of information and detail in this article would not have come from Clarence House; they were plainly listening in to calls as well as spending large sums on private investigators.\u201d <\/p>\n

ANL strongly denied wrongdoing and is defending the claims. <\/p>\n

Four years, a 45-day trial: Wait for judgment after claim papers were first served <\/p>\n

October, 2022 was when the claim form was first filed by the seven claimants against ANL, before, almost four years later, the trial started at the Royal Courts of Justice on 19 January. It lasted 45 days until 31 March, when closing arguments from all parties were complete.<\/p>\n

On 7 July this year, 1,370 days after the claim forms were first filed on 6 October, a judgment was expected.<\/p>\n

Seven claimants: Harry among household names waiting on ruling <\/p>\n

The Duke of Sussex and a group of other household names face a wait to find out whether they have won their High Court cases against the Daily Mail\u2019s publisher. <\/p>\n

During an 11-week trial, the High Court in London heard claims brought by the group \u2013 which also included Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish \u2013 against ANL of unlawful information gathering. <\/p>\n

The rest of the group are Liz Hurley, Sadie Frost and Sir Simon Hughes.<\/p>\n

\"SirSir Elton John giving evidence during the trial (PA)<\/p>\n

Lady Lawrence claimed the Daily Mail was \u201cpretending\u201d to support her in getting justice for her son Stephen Lawrence, who was murdered in a racist attack in 1993. Her lawyers claim she was \u201cextensively targeted\u201d by private investigators to obtain information, including through corrupt payments to police. <\/p>\n

Sir Elton and Mr Furnish alleged 10 articles about them <\/a>were based on unlawful information gathering, including unlawfully obtained medical information and landline tapping. The couple claimed their son Zachary\u2019s birth certificate was stolen before they received a copy.<\/p>\n

Ms Frost claimed that information behind some articles about her had been \u201chacked from my voicemails\u201d, as they \u201cwere word for word\u201d from her messages. <\/p>\n

Ms Hurley accused the Daily Mail publisher of stealing her medical records while she was pregnant with her son.<\/p>\n

ANL denied the allegations.<\/p>\n

14 articles: Harry\u2019s case hinges on stories published between 2001 and 2013<\/p>\n

The Duke of Sussex claimed 14 articles published by ANL were based on unlawful information gathering. The stories, his lawyers said, were written between 2001 and 2013, and \u201cfocus primarily and in a highly intrusive and damaging way, on the relationships which he formed, or rather tried to form, during those years prior to meeting his now wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex\u201d. <\/p>\n

Europe: The Way Back<\/p>\n

We’re campaigning to rebuild Britain’s future in Europe<\/p>\n

The articles include one on the decision to name the Duke of Sussex as the godfather to the child of Tiggy Legge-Bourke \u2013 his former nanny. According to barrister David Sherborne\u2019s written submissions, only three people were aware of the decision prior to the article being written by Mail on Sunday journalist Katie Nicholl, with nobody in the wider family, including the now King, being informed. Mr Sherborne said there is \u201cno plausibly legitimate source for the information\u201d. ANL said the article was \u201centirely sourced from legitimate sources\u201d.<\/p>\n

Another story was on Harry\u2019s reported relationship with TV presenter Natalie Pinkham. Mr Sherborne said the information reported by Ms Nicholl was only known to an \u201cintimate circle of friends\u201d, and it was \u201cnot credible\u201d that she obtained it from a club promoter or a freelance journalist. ANL said the journalist \u201chad several sources who knew both Ms Pinkham and the Duke of Sussex well at the time\u201d. <\/p>\n

\"SirSir Simon Hughes, the Duke of Sussex, Elizabeth Hurley, Damian Hurley and barrister David Sherborne at the Royal Courts of Justice (PA Wire)<\/p>\n

One story was on Harry\u2019s relationship with his first serious girlfriend, Laura Gerard-Leigh, and their \u201cintentions and habits as a couple\u201d. Harry alleged it was \u201cextraordinary\u201d that the information made its way into the press because of the \u201cprivacy he had attached to it and the \u2018tiny\u2019 circle of friends who knew\u201d. ANL said the story, written by Ms Nicholl and freelance journalist Andy Buckwell, was partly based on photographs taken of the pair with friends at the Badminton Horse Trials. <\/p>\n

40 journalists: Members of the press involved in the trial on behalf of ANL<\/p>\n

More than 40 witnesses were involved in the trial on behalf of ANL, including former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre, who said in his written evidence it was \u201cinconceivable\u201d that anyone at the paper would have carried out the alleged activities.<\/p>\n

He later said the claims had had a \u201cdeeply upsetting\u201d and sometimes \u201ctraumatic\u201d impact on staff at the paper, adding: \u201cI have witnessed the anguish of honest, dedicated journalists who, for three years now, have had an insidious dark shadow hanging over their lives.\u201d <\/p>\n

ANL said the claim had been conceived by press reform campaign group Hacked Off, as part of a \u201cpolitical campaign to show that ANL had misled the Leveson Inquiry with a view to putting pressure on the government to implement part two of that inquiry\u201d. Mr Dacre told the court he \u201cemphatically\u201d denied an allegation that he lied to the inquiry into press standards. <\/p>\n

Up to \u00a338m: Cost of legal battle<\/p>\n

Whatever the outcome on Tuesday, the case has been extremely expensive. <\/p>\n

Ahead of the trial, all parties filed their budgets to the court, with the total budget for the claimants \u00a318.7m. The budget for ANL totalled \u00a319.9m.<\/p>\n

In a ruling published after a costs management hearing last year, Mr Justice Nicklin and Judge David Cook concluded the sums were \u201cmanifestly excessive and therefore disproportionate\u201d, and allowed for budgets totalling \u00a34.1m for the claimants and \u00a34.4m for the ANL.<\/p>\n

The actual budget could be higher, but the judges\u2019 limits will likely reflect any recovery of costs that could be awarded.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Your support helps us to tell the story From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":75690,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[4],"tags":[6161,6355,1760,5,6],"class_list":["post-77978","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-uk","tag-court","tag-horizontal","tag-royals","tag-uk","tag-united-kingdom"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@UnitedKingdom\/116875651181021144","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77978","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=77978"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77978\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/75690"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77978"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77978"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/britain\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77978"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}