Prince Harry’s latest litigation against a prominent British tabloid group not only targets the company itself but also individuals whom Harry has held personal grudges against for years.
He thinks the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, who have held powerful positions at News Group Newspapers for a number of years, sanctioned (what Harry sees) as the unfair invasion of his privacy in his teenage and early adult years.
The Duke of Sussex, as part of his trial against News Group Newspapers (NGN) scheduled for January 2025, wanted to bring further specific allegations against high-profile executives who he alleges turned a “blind eye” to their journalists’ alleged unlawful information gathering.
NGN’s lawyers deny the allegations made against the company and its staff.
Today, Prince Harry failed in his application to bring new allegations against media mogul Rupert Murdoch.
The royal’s lawyer, David Sherborne, also attempted to make allegations about the “destruction and concealment” of evidence by people working for NGN.
This ruling would have been a blow to The Duke of Sussex, who sees it as his life’s mission to hold powerful media executives to account for alleged unlawful information gathering.
For Harry, it isn’t about the financial costs.
Actor, Hugh Grant, recently settled his similar claim against NGN because the legal costs were getting too high for him.
But Prince Harry is determined to fight on and was partially successful at today’s ruling.
His lawyers were granted “permission in principle” to name and make allegations against more journalists and private investigators
Multimillion-dollar media deals could be helping Harry fund his legal fight, and there is no sign he is backing down anytime soon.
Another court appearance from the King’s son to give evidence in July 2025 has also not been ruled out.
A spokesperson for News Group Newspapers said: “In 2011 an unreserved apology was made by NGN to victims of voicemail interception by the News of the World. Since then NGN has been paying financial damages to those with proper claims. In some cases, it has made commercial sense for both parties to come to a settlement agreement before trial to bring a resolution to the matter. As we reach the tail end of the litigation, NGN is drawing a line under the disputed matters.
“These civil proceedings have been running for more than a decade and deal with events 13-28 years ago.
“At a hearing in March 2024, the Claimants sought to introduce wide-ranging allegations into their pleadings. NGN argued that a number of these were irrelevant to the fair and just determination of claims and had nothing to do with seeking compensation for victims of phone hacking or unlawful information gathering.”
“The Court in its Judgment today has thoroughly vindicated NGN's position and did not give permission to introduce large and significant portions of the amendments.
"Mr Justice Fancourt said in his Judgment (at para 79):
..there is a desire on the part of those running the litigation on the claimants’ side to shoot at ‘trophy targets’, whether those are political issues or high-profile individuals.
“He stated that this cannot become 'an end in itself' and has recognised the intention of the Claimants to make amendments for 'collateral reasons' that do not further the proceedings.
“NGN stated that such 'collateral reasons' are primarily aimed at giving publicity to allegations against NGN executives.
“Lawyers for the claimants work with convicted phone-hackers and employ anti press campaigners and activists who seek to use the claims to make allegations within the protection of open justice principles. Many similar allegations were previously tested in the criminal courts or investigated by the police and the CPS between 2011-15.
"Today’s Judgment has ruled that a significant amount of these amendments are not material or proportionate to the case.
"In relation to the Duke of Sussex, the Judge refused his request to amend his pleadings to include numerous additional allegations, including those from before 1996 or after 2011. He ordered the proper redrafting of his claim to remove allegations of phone hacking and activity relating to phone hacking in accordance with a previous order following NGN's successful summary judgment application which resulted in this part of his claim being ruled out of time.
"NGN welcomes the Judge’s decisions and comments."
A representative for Prince Harry has been contacted for comment.
