Prince Harry returns to London’s High Court on Monday for the final leg of his privacy battle against the publisher of the Daily Mail, with millions of dollars in damages and his broader media-reform crusade hanging in the balance.
At a Glance
- Prince Harry leads seven high-profile claimants suing Associated Newspapers Ltd. for alleged car-bugging, medical-record snooping, and phone eavesdropping.
- The nine-week trial is the third and last chapter of a lawsuit filed in 2022.
- Harry will testify again, one year after becoming the first senior royal to take the stand in more than a century.
- Why it matters: A win could force new safeguards on British tabloids and deliver a major financial hit to the Mail’s parent company.
The Duke of Sussex is the lead litigant in a group that also includes Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost, anti-racism campaigner Doreen Lawrence, and former politician Simon Hughes. They allege that Associated Newspapers hired private investigators to plant listening devices, blag medical records, and intercept voicemail messages to fuel sensational stories.
Associated Newspapers has called the claims “preposterous” and denies any wrongdoing.
Royal rift and royal testimony
The trial’s opening week clashes with King Charles III’s planned visit to Scotland, making a father-son reunion unlikely. Harry’s trip is expected to be limited to the first days of testimony.
Relations between the palace and the California-based prince have been icy since the 2020 exit from royal duties and the publication of Harry’s 2023 memoir Spare. A brief tea meeting last fall hinted at a thaw, but court schedules now keep them apart.
Harry blames the press for the 1997 car-crash death of his mother, Princess Diana, and for what he describes as relentless harassment of his wife, Meghan, that drove the couple to relocate to the United States.
Wins and losses before the witness box
The case has already produced a string of pre-trial rulings each side has spun as victories.
- Judge Matthew Nicklin refused to throw the suit out, saying the claims have a “real prospect of succeeding” despite dating back as far as 1993.
- The same judge blocked the claimants from using confidential records disclosed to a government phone-hacking inquiry, but officials later granted permission to introduce the documents.
Harry’s lawyers say the paperwork shows payments by the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday to outside investigators.
The investigator with two stories
A private investigator named Gavin Burrows filed a sworn statement supporting the celebrities’ allegations, then filed a second statement denying he ever targeted them for Associated Newspapers.
- 2019-2021: Burrows tells media he “must have done hundreds of jobs” for the Mail between 2000 and 2005, naming Harry, Elton John, and Hurley among his targets.
- 2022: Claimants cite Burrows in court filings.
- 2023: Burrows signs a new statement saying he was not hired by Associated Newspapers to carry out unlawful acts.
Attorney David Sherborne, representing the claimants, told an earlier hearing the clients learned they were hacking victims only when investigators “came forward to do the right thing.” The impact of Burrows’ conflicting accounts will be tested under cross-examination.
Déjà vu for Harry in the witness box
This will be Harry’s second time testifying in a U.K. civil case. In June 2023 he won a judgment against Mirror Group Newspapers that found “widespread and habitual” phone hacking. He also accepted substantial damages from Rupert Murdoch’s News Group after the publisher issued an unprecedented apology for years of intrusion.
Those victories emboldened the prince to expand his legal campaign to Associated Newspapers, his largest target yet in terms of circulation and revenue.
What the trial will examine
The High Court will weigh whether the Mail titles:
- commissioned private eyes to bug cars and homes;
- paid hospital staff and accountants to leak confidential data;
- authorized the interception of voicemail messages.
Associated Newspapers argues the claims are stale and that no senior editor approved illegal newsgathering. Company lawyers will press the judge to dismiss or sharply limit the scope of evidence from the 1990s and early 2000s.
Billions in potential exposure
No specific damage figure has been published, but British privacy verdicts can yield six- or seven-figure payouts per claimant. With seven plaintiffs seeking both damages and injunctions, the financial exposure for Associated Newspapers could reach into the millions, plus substantial legal costs.
A loss would also add regulatory pressure on the Mail titles at a time when Parliament is debating stronger press oversight laws.
Key takeaways
- Trial starts Monday and is scheduled to run nine weeks.
- Harry will testify early, then return to California.
- Associated Newspapers faces multiple allegations of unlawful surveillance; the publisher denies them all.
- A judgment is expected months after closing arguments, setting new precedent on privacy law and tabloid tactics.
News Of Fort Worth first reported the trial timeline and Harry’s travel plans.
