The Duke of Sussex, Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence have lost their High Court claims against the Daily Mail’s publisher over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
A group of household names, also including David Furnish, Liz Hurley and Sadie Frost, alleged acts including voicemail interception, landline tapping and obtaining information by deception – also known as “blagging”, were carried out by private investigators, freelance journalists and staff at Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).
ANL strongly denied the claims as it defended the cases, which it also said had been brought too late.
In a decision on Tuesday, judge Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all of the claims, ruling that none of the group of seven had proven the allegations of unlawful information gathering.
He said in the 436-page ruling: “For the reasons given in this judgment, each of the claimants’ claims is dismissed.”
Following the judgment, ANL said it was an “overwhelming victory” and a “magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism” in a case with legal costs of more than £50 million.
In a statement, the publisher continued: “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.”
ANL added: “The reputations of our decent and hard-working journalists were terribly impugned, and today they have been exonerated.
“As the judgment clearly shows, every single article was legitimately sourced.”
In the ruling, Mr Justice Nicklin said it was clear Harry “wished the court to understand the personal impact of the matters in issue” during his evidence in January.
The judge later said that it was up to the group of claimants to prove the allegations of unlawful information gathering.
He said: “Whilst the standard of proof remains the balance of probabilities, the more serious, and inherently less probable, the allegation, the more cogent the evidence required to prove it.”
Mr Justice Nicklin added later: “In substance, the claimants’ case invites the court to conclude that, because the information was private and because Associated cannot positively explain how it was sourced, the article must have been unlawfully sourced.
“That is not a permissible approach.”
Dozens of people gave evidence during the trial in London, including Harry, the rest of the group of household names, also including Sir Simon Hughes, as well as many current or former ANL journalists and executives.
During around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time “because of the institution I was in”.
ANL editor-in-chief and former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre also gave evidence in the trial.
Following Tuesday’s ruling, Mr Dacre said that the “trumped-up action” “should never have been brought to trial”.
Under Mr Dacre’s editorship, the Daily Mail
campaigned to bring Mr Lawrence’s killers to justice.
“Why Baroness Lawrence – for whom we have always had profound respect and sympathy – chose to turn on both the paper, and the brilliant reporter who campaigned for justice for her son for over two decades, is something I will never be able to comprehend.”
Mr Dacre later described the case as a “conspiracy” to destroy a paper, “financed by the orgy-loving, racist Max Mosley”.
As part of its defence, ANL said that Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists provide a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”, including friends and “leaky” social circles, press officers and spokespersons, as well as previous reporting, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies.
The trial also heard arguments over whether the cases were brought in time as the law states that legal action related to unlawful information-gathering must be launched within six years of someone discovering they could have a claim.
Mr Justice Nicklin said that even if unlawful information gathering had been proven, Sir Simon and Ms Frost’s claims had been brought too late.
The decision comes after Harry returned to the UK on Monday evening ahead of five days of appearances in London and Birmingham, including marking the one-year countdown to the 2027 Invictus Games.
The duke will not stay at Buckingham Palace during his return, with his spokesman saying on Monday that it was “disappointing” the offer from the King had been “withdrawn at the last moment”, with the looming judgment given as the reason.
A further hearing in the claims is now expected to take place, lasting two days from July 29.
