The Duke of Sussex and six others have lost a high-stakes case against the publisher of the Daily Mail over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
All of the claims were dismissed by a UK High Court judge on Tuesday after the group failed to prove the allegations against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).
The judge, Matthew Nicklin, said in a summary of his ruling that the claimants’ allegations were serious but suspicion was not enough. He said the claimants had to prove that the information used by ANL for its stories 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,” he wrote in the summary.
Prince Harry, who arrived in the United Kingdom on Monday evening, was one of several high-profile figures who accused ANL of using unlawful practices at its titles for stories between 1993 and 2011.
The group of household names also included singer Elton John and his husband David Furness as well as actress Elizabeth Hurley, campaigner Doreen Lawrence, actress Sadie Frost and former politician Simon Hughes.
The court ruling was handed down as the King’s younger son and fifth in line to the British throne started a week of engagements in the UK to mark one year until the 2027 Invictus Games in Birmingham. His wife Meghan and their children Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet did not accompany the duke to London over security concerns.
Shortly before the court ruling came down, Prince Harry arrived at think tank Chatham House in London for his first public event of the week.
During the trial earlier this year, which lasted more than two months, the court heard claims from the group that ANL had allegedly engaged in a number of illegal activities, including that it tasked private investigators to engage in voicemail interception, phone tapping and “blagging” of sensitive private records through deception.
The tabloid publisher repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, insisting that its journalists reported their stories using legitimate sources. It also asserted that the group brought the claims too late.
This story has been updated with additional information.
