THE Duke of Sussex, Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence’s claims against the Daily Mail’s publisher over alleged unlawful information gathering have been dismissed by a High Court judge.
A group of household names alleged acts including voicemail interception, landline tapping and obtaining information by deception – also known as “blagging”, 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 said 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.”
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.
Dozens of people gave evidence during the trial in London, including Harry, the rest of the group of household names of Liz Hurley, Sadie Frost and 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”.
He also said in his written evidence that “knowingly false” information was added to stories to “put me off the scent”, to conceal unlawful methods, including voicemail interception.
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.
Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers full statement
They said: “Associated Newspapers welcomes today’s judgment, which is 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.
“For some of the most outrageous allegations made when the case was launched in a blaze of publicity four years ago – placing bugs in people’s cars and homes, listening to calls as they were made and illicitly accessing bank accounts – no credible evidence was ever presented.
“As we said at the time, these allegations were ‘lurid’ and ‘preposterous’, and were a fishing expedition by the claimants and their legal teams in a politically motivated campaign to muzzle the free press.
“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.
“Associated Newspapers thanks Mr Justice Nicklin for the patience and wisdom he has displayed throughout this misguided legal action, which has wasted so much valuable court time and more than £50 million in legal costs.
“We will look to resolve outstanding issues, including the recovery of the costs we have incurred while defending ourselves against this egregious litigation.”
