Prince Harry Loses London Privacy Invasion Trial Against Daily Mail Publisher

Prince Harry has lost his London privacy case against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday in London’s High Court.

The civil case against Associated Newspapers Ltd. for allegedly unlawful information gathering saw the High Court judge on Tuesday morning rule against the Duke of Sussex and six other claimants, including  Elton John and husband David Furnish, actors Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost.

In his judgement, Justice Nicklin said the allegations against the Daily Mail publisher required more evidence to be proven in the civil case. “The court accepted that, given the nature and age of the allegations, the claimants’ cases often depended on inference. But suspicion, even where understandable, was not enough. The claimants had to prove that the information complained of had been obtained unlawfully. The court rejected the argument that, simply because information was private, and because Associated could not positively explain how it had been sourced, the relevant article must have been unlawfully sourced.”

The judgement added the claimants “failed to prove their pleaded allegations of UIG (unlawful information gathering). The court rejected the attempt to prove the claims by broad inference where there remained a legitimate and realistic possible lawful source pathway, or where the article-specific evidence did not prove that the relevant information must have been obtained unlawfully.” All claims against Associated Newspapers were dismissed by the High Court judge.

Associated Newspapers in a statement said the High Court judgement was “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.”

Prince Harry and fellow claimants alleged “grave breaches of privacy” and more illegalities, including the interception of voicemails, tapping of landlines, paying off police officers “with corrupt links to private investigators,” faking medical records, and bugging celebrity homes by the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday.

Publisher Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) denied what it called “lurid” and “preposterous” allegations, maintaining that the lawsuit was an affront to the hard work of their journalists. Prince Harry traveled from his home in California to London to hear the High Court judgement, before attending events around his upcoming Invictus Games.

Prince Harry has had success in other privacy cases. In January 2025, Harry settled his case against the publisher of the Rupert Murdoch-owned The Sun newspaper, who offered the Duke a “full and unequivocal” apology.

He brought the case to publisher NGN, claiming his privacy had been violated by alleged phone hacking and unlawful information gathering carried out by journalists and private investigators working for The Sun and the defunct News of the World between 1996 and 2011.

July 7, 7:15 a.m. Updated with a statement from Associated Newspapers.