London – On Friday, High Court Judge Matthew Nicklin will issue a written judgment determining the interim contribution Prince Harry and six other claimants must make toward the Daily Mail’s legal expenses after the court rejected their privacy lawsuit. The ruling follows a comprehensive dismissal of the case last month, in which the prince, singer Elton John and five other public figures alleged unlawful conduct by the Mail’s titles, including phone hacking.
Background of the lawsuit
The claimants argued that the Daily Mail had obtained private information about them through illegal means. After an 11‑week trial, Judge Nicklin concluded the plaintiffs failed to prove that any published material was obtained unlawfully, stating that mere suspicion was insufficient. The decision was described by the publisher, Associated Newspapers, as a decisive victory for a free press.
Potential cost liability
During a July hearing, Associated Newspapers disclosed that its legal bill had reached £34.5 million (approximately $45.8 million). The claimants’ insurance policy covers only £16 million, leaving a substantial shortfall. The publisher is seeking an interim payment of £10 million, while the claimants have offered £8 million.
If Judge Nicklin orders the claimants to pay on an “indemnity basis,” they would be required to cover the publisher’s costs without the need for Associated to demonstrate that the expenses were reasonable or proportionate. This would place the financial burden squarely on the losing parties.
Reactions from counsel
Associated’s lawyer Antony White argued that the claimants’ broad and serious allegations, presented without supporting evidence, inflated the publisher’s costs. He also characterized Prince Harry’s public comments after the verdict as an abuse of his position and celebrity status.
Representing the claimants, lawyer Nicholas Bacon called the £34.5 million bill “eye‑watering” and far beyond an agreed budget. He suggested that the publisher was attempting to “teach the claimants a lesson” and warned that awarding indemnity costs would be unjust.
Implications for the royal family
The cost hearing comes shortly after news that Prince Harry, his wife Meghan and their two children will relocate to Britain from California this month. The couple, who stepped back from official duties in 2020, have confirmed they will not resume any royal roles nor receive public funding.
Next steps
Judge Nicklin’s written decision will be released after the hearing; neither Prince Harry nor the other claimants will be present. No determination has been made regarding a possible appeal by the claimants.
As the case unfolds, it highlights the tension between privacy rights of public figures and the role of a free press in a democratic society.
Original reporting: Appleton, WI News Feed (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
