Us News

As Prince Harry loses his case against the publisher of the Daily Mail, here’s a look at his legal battles with the media

London – Britain’s Prince Harry lost his case against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday tabloid newspapers on July 7, in what was widely expected to be the last of his court battles against the UK media.

Below is a look at all the legal and media disputes that the second son of King Charles III has been involved in:

Associated Newspaper Group

Harry, Duke of Sussex, was among a number of plaintiffs – including pop star Elton John and actress Elizabeth Hurley – accusing Associated Newspapers (ANL), publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday, of illegally collecting information about them through methods such as wiretapping, intercepting voicemails and impersonating people to obtain personal information.

Harry’s lawyers and other accusers say the alleged acts took place between 1993 and 2011, but the conduct continued until 2018.

ANL denied wrongdoing, called the allegations “silly,” and argued that the 50 or so articles involved in the lawsuit were based on information gathered by law.

The UK High Court dismissed all the claims on July 7, saying they could not be proven.

News Group Newspapers

Prince Harry launched legal action against News Group Newspapers (NGN), which publishes ILANGA and used to publish the defunct World News, in September 2019, accusing its journalists of illegally hacking his voicemails. The case was settled in court in January 2025, lawyers for both sides said, NGN deeply apologized and “substantial damage” to Harry and his defendant, the former attorney general of the UK.

NGN argued that the claims were brought too late and should have been issued under the UK’s six-year statute of limitations, but Harry said the delay was due a secret agreement between the publisher and the royal familywhich NGN denied its existence.

The Duke of Sussex alleges that NGN employees hacked his phone and used spies and deception to illegally collect his information over two decades ago.

Mirror Group Newspapers

Prince Harry’s lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers was settled in February 2024. Harry he testified in court as part of that case, seeking voicemail hacking and other illegal data collection activities. It was the first time a senior member of the British royal family had given evidence in court since the 19th century.

Prior to the decision, the judge had found that only 15 of the 33 subjects originally considered in the case were the product of wiretapping or other illegal information gathering. He awarded Harry a “proportionate,” $180,000 in damages, as the lawsuit had shown that the Mirror Group “played only a small part in all that the Duke suffered” and was “innocent of all illegal activities directed at the Duke, and that the good conduct of the Press for many years was not against the Duke.”

“I think his phone was hacked on a low level, and it’s possible that this is carefully controlled by certain people at each newspaper,” the judge said. “There was a tendency for Duke in his testimony to assume that everything published was the product of voicemail interception because phone hacking was rampant within the Mirror Group at the time. But phone hacking was not the only tool of journalists at the time, and his claims in relation to the other 18 articles did not stand up to careful analysis.”

The settlement that Harry received in February was related to the claims of 115 other issues., CBS News partner network reports BBC News. Publishers agreed to pay his legal fees and pay an additional $370,000 in damages.

Separate ANL suit

Separately, Harry sued ANL for allegedly defaming an article about him legal battle with the UK government about his security plans, but withdrew his request early last year.

The article, published in the Daily Mail in February 2022, alleged that Harry tried to keep his legal battle with the government a secret.

The prince is also in front accept the apology and damages from the same publisher over other articles in a different case of freedom.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button