In a significant legal setback, Prince Harry’s lawyers were reprimanded by High Court Judge Mr. Justice Nicklin during the ongoing privacy breach case against Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL). The Duke of Sussex, along with several other claimants, including Sir Elton John and Baroness Lawrence, is suing ANL for alleged unlawful activities such as phone hacking and private investigations spanning up to 30 years.
The latest ruling came after Prince Harry’s legal team attempted to introduce new allegations into the case, including claims that ANL commissioned “burglaries to order” and allegations that Catherine, Princess of Wales, had been targeted by Mail journalists. The judge harshly criticized these efforts, stating that such claims were outside the scope of the litigation and should be removed. He also clarified that the case could not rely on evidence from previous phone-hacking lawsuits against other newspapers, such as The Sun and the Mirror, as those were entirely separate legal matters.
The claimants, who accuse ANL of unlawful practices like placing listening devices in cars, accessing private records, and intercepting phone conversations, were also chastised for attempting to prove broader illegal activities at the Mail publications. Mr. Justice Nicklin deemed this unnecessary and likened it to an “enormous exercise” akin to a public inquiry, which was not appropriate for the case at hand.
The case has been unfolding for months, with the claimants seeking justice for their alleged victimization. The legal battle could have broader implications, with the potential for a trial scheduled for mid-January 2026. This could see Prince Harry taking the witness stand once again in his final lawsuit against the tabloid press. While the claimants’ legal team may appeal this ruling, the court’s decision has made clear the need for the case to remain tightly focused on the original allegations.
In addition to the main allegations, there have been revelations about payments made to private investigators for information on Prince William’s 21st birthday party, but the judge insisted that the scope of the case must not be expanded further. This ruling serves as a critical moment in the lawsuit, with the possibility of future legal challenges ahead.
Leave a Reply