PA MediaThe Duke of Sussex and a group of other household names face a wait to find out whether they have won their High Court cases against the Daily Mail’s publisher.
During an 11-week trial, the High Court in London heard claims brought by the group – which also includes Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish – against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) of unlawful information gathering.
These include allegations of voicemail interception, landline tapping, and obtaining information by deception – also known as “blagging”, carried out by private investigators, freelance journalists and ANL staff.
PA MediaANL strongly denies the claims and has defended the case, saying it “has established a complete defence to all parts of the claims on the merits”, and that the cases have been brought too late.
At the end of the trial on Tuesday, judge Mr Justice Nicklin said a decision in the case “will take some time”.
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.
The civil trial included:
– 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.
– Lady Lawrence claimed the Daily Mail was “pretending” to support her in getting justice for her son Stephen Lawrence, who was murdered in a racist attack in 1993. Her lawyers claim she was “extensively targeted” by private investigators to obtain information, including through corrupt payments to police.
– Sir Elton and Mr Furnish alleged 10 articles about them were based on unlawful information gathering, including unlawfully obtained medical information and landline tapping. The couple claimed their son Zachary’s birth certificate was stolen before they received a copy, with the Rocketman singer telling the court their case “contains the most horrendous things in the world that you can ever suffer from a privacy point of view”.
– Ms Frost claimed that information behind some articles about her had been “hacked from my voicemails”, as they “were word for word” from her messages. Part of her claim relates to an unpublished article about a 2003 ectopic pregnancy, which Frost said she only told her partner and “maybe also one of her very close friends”. The group’s barrister, David Sherborne, said an ANL journalist found out details about the pregnancy and subsequent termination which “must be from unlawful information gathering”.
PA Media– Mr Sherborne said that ANL would not have needed to use private investigators to find information available through lawful resources, such as directory enquiries and genealogists, but instead used them “to obtain information that by its very nature, is bound to have been obtained unlawfully in the absence of evidence to the contrary”. This included the alleged blagging of medical records, bank information and travel arrangements.
– 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”. Antony White KC said in written submissions that ANL had mounted a “robust and comprehensive defence”, later telling the court: “Ordinary, legitimate journalism, often drawing on previous reporting or confidential sources, is usually more likely than phone hacking or phone tapping or other forms of unlawful information gathering.”
– Legitimate sources for stories were said to include friends and “leaky” social circles, press officers and spokespersons, as well as previous reporting, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies. Giving evidence in March, Katie Nicholl, the former diary editor of the Mail on Sunday, said that not all of Harry’s close friends were “tight lipped”, and that she had “real contacts genuinely close to Prince Harry”.
– More than 40 witnesses were involved in the trial on behalf of ANL, including former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre, who said in his written evidence it was “inconceivable” that anyone at the paper would have carried out the alleged activities. He later said the claims had had a “deeply upsetting” and sometimes “traumatic” impact on staff at the paper, adding: “I have witnessed the anguish of honest, dedicated journalists who, for three years now, have had an insidious dark shadow hanging over their lives.”
– ANL said the claim had been conceived by press reform campaign group Hacked Off, as part of a “political campaign to show that Associated had misled the Leveson Inquiry with a view to putting pressure on the Government to implement part two of that inquiry”. Mr Dacre told the court he “emphatically” denied an allegation that he lied to the inquiry into press standards.
– 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 Sherborne said the cases were brought in time and said in written submissions it was “unrealistic to suggest” that the group could have “discovered facts that they themselves were victims of wrongdoing” or “reasonably believed” this to be the case in October 2016.
PA Media– ANL argued the cases were brought too late and the group should have known that they could have brought a claim sooner through media reporting of the phone hacking scandal and the Leveson Inquiry. Mr White said that there was evidence of “actual knowledge” in Ms Hurley’s claim, and “an overwhelming case of constructive knowledge” for the whole group. Mr White also said that Sir Simon and Ms Frost took steps to “camouflage the true position” in relation to when they knew they could have a claim.
– The court also heard evidence from private investigator Gavin Burrows, who allegedly said in a witness statement in August 2021 that he targeted “hundreds, possibly thousands of people” through voicemail hacking, landline tapping and accessing financial and medical information for a journalist at the Mail On Sunday. But in a statement last year, Mr Burrows denied ever conducting unlawful information gathering on behalf of ANL and said that his purported signature on the 2021 statement was forged. In his oral evidence from an undisclosed location, Mr Burrows denied “switching sides” and said he “never worked for Associated”. Mr Sherborne previously said it was “impossible” for the signature on the 2021 statement to have been forged.
At the end of the trial, Mr Justice Nicklin thanked everyone involved in the proceedings and stressed the importance of transparency.
He said: “The trial began on January 19 and since then the court has heard from a substantial amount of witnesses.
“The proceedings have been observed by a very large number of people… with attendance of people online running to hundreds on the busiest days.”
He later said that he will be working on the judgment “full-time” from the next legal term, adding: “I will be toiling away on the judgment.”
Follow STV News on WhatsApp
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
