LONDON — The next chapter in the legal saga of Prince Harry versus Britain’s tabloid media is set to unfold Tuesday in a high-profile trial against the newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch. This trial presents significant risks for Harry, potentially costing him millions even in the event of a favorable verdict.
Prince Harry, who is 40 years old and the younger son of King Charles III, along with one co-claimant, stands out among the many individuals who have opted to settle their claims against News Group Newspapers, which publishes The Sun and formerly, News of the World. These claims revolve around accusations of illegal phone tapping and other intrusive practices that infringed on their privacy.
This case marks the first trial against News Group since the phone hacking scandal led to the closure of News of the World over a decade ago. Over 1,300 claims have already been settled by the company. The trial was originally scheduled for the morning, but it was postponed to the afternoon to allow the parties involved to engage in private negotiations outside the courtroom.
The Duke of Sussex’s pursuit of justice against the media has already seen him inside London’s High Court numerous times, a struggle rooted in his belief that the relentless press contributed to the tragic death of his mother, Princess Diana, who died in a car crash while being pursued by photographers. Harry attributes much of the media’s animosity toward him and his wife, actress Meghan Markle, as factors that forced them to abandon royal life and relocate to the United States in 2020.
In his continuous battle for accountability within the media, Harry acknowledges that it has created a rift with his family, yet he feels this mission is imperative to unveil injustices. He triumphed in a similar case against the Daily Mirror’s publisher in 2023 and currently has an active case against the publisher of the Daily Mail.
The allegations brought forth in this case highlight purported unlawful activities by News Group’s journalists and their hired private investigators who allegedly invaded Harry’s privacy from 1996 to 2011. Co-claimant Tom Watson, a former deputy leader of the Labour Party, has also accused News Group of intercepting his voicemails while he was probing the hacking scandal.
The legal team for the claimants asserts that the newspapers routinely engaged in deceptive tactics to access personal medical records, phone logs, and flight information. They allege that executives of News Group actively concealed these illicit activities, including the destruction of key documents. In response, News Group characterized these allegations as unfounded and vigorously denied them.
High-profile former executives such as Will Lewis, now the CEO of the Washington Post, and Rebekah Brooks, who heads News UK, are implicated in the alleged misconduct but both deny any wrongdoing. Brooks was acquitted of conspiracy charges related to phone hacking in 2014, although her former colleague Andy Coulson received a prison sentence.
Despite the assertive denial from News Group, they argue that Harry’s lawsuit is invalidated due to a six-year statute of limitations. The publisher did concede to apologizing to the victims of phone tapping at News of the World in 2011, but The Sun has never acknowledged any liability.
Another contributor to the legal landscape is actor Hugh Grant, a co-claimant with Harry, who revealed he settled for a significant financial sum to evade a potential legal bill of around £10 million ($12.3 million) even if he won in court. Under English civil law, plaintiffs who receive a lower judgment than a previous settlement offer are typically responsible for covering both sides’ legal fees, a rule designed to deter prolonged litigation.
Despite the daunting financial potential of this trial, Harry remains resolute. He addressed his determination at a New York Times summit, asserting that his fight for accountability is pivotal, especially as he is one of the final remaining individuals capable of pursuing this issue.
This trial, predicted to last ten weeks, will see Harry return to the witness stand, which hasn’t happened for a senior royal since the late 1800s when Prince Albert Edward testified. This ongoing confrontation places him at odds with a family known for its “never complain, never explain” ethos, further complicating family dynamics.
Harry noted in court documents that his father expressed disapproval of his legal actions, while his brother, Prince William, received a substantial settlement from News Group for a separate complaint.
While Harry’s efforts at accountability have contributed to tension within the royal family, he has expressed a desire for them to join in resisting media offenses. “But, you know, I’m doing this for my reasons,” he reflected.
Despite numerous challenges, including having certain claims dismissed in previous court hearings, Harry remains committed to moving forward with his case. The publisher has thus far struggled to dismiss his claims, although a judge did rule earlier that Harry should have acted sooner regarding phone tapping accusations.
Moreover, attempts to broaden the lawsuit to include allegations concerning his mother or to implicate Rupert Murdoch were also rejected, with the judge indicating that these issues would not add substance to the ongoing claims against other involved parties.
Ultimately, the judge dismissed Harry’s attempts to suggest that there was a secret arrangement between Buckingham Palace and News Group, asserting that there was no evidence to support Harry’s claims regarding approval from the late Queen Elizabeth II for any such deal.
