Prince Harry says he lost friends and suffered from the pressures of “suspicion and paranoia” thanks to stories allegedly fuelled by unlawful newsgathering, the High Court heard at the start of a bombshell battle with the media.
The Duke of Sussex made a surprise appearance at court on Monday for the start of four days of hearings in his latest legal claim against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday.
Harry is part of a group of high-profile people who are suing the newspaper publisher, alleging illegal newsgathering, listening in to phone calls, hiring private investigators to bug cars and homes, and payments to public officials including police officers.
His fellow litigants, Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish, arrived at the High Court at lunchtime, in time for the afternoon session.
In written legal submissions, it is revealed Harry says he suffered “suspicion and paranoia…caused by Associated’s publication of the unlawful articles - friends were lost or cut off as a result and everyone became a ‘suspect’, since he was misled by the way that the articles were written into believing that those close to him were the source of this information being provided to Associated’s newspapers.”
Harry is suing ANL alongside Sir Elton, Mr Furnish, actresses Liz Hurley and Sadie Frost, former Liberal Democrat MP Sir Simon Hughes and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, whose son Stephen was murdered in 1993.
In her submissions to the court, Baroness Lawrence says she “became deeply paranoid by the strange things happening around her, and by the unexplained disclosure of her private information as well as information relating to Stephen’s murder investigation in the Daily Mail”.
She says she wrongly believed leaks had come from within the Crown Prosecution Service or police officers, but now believes “illegal activity" from news organisations was to blame.
Sir Elton and Mr Furnish say they suffered “frightening” disclosures about their private lives which “had a serious and profound effect” upon them, adding that they “became deeply paranoid and suspicious”.
“As a consequence (they) now have someone watching the cameras in their home of residence every night”, the legal papers reveal.
Part of the submissions due to be made this week is that the claimants have waited too long to bring the case against ANL, and have allegedly known about the stories written about them and allegations of unlawful activity for years.
Lawyers for ANL point out Prince Harry, according to his memoir Spare, had a “keen interest in the prosecution of journalists from the News of the World”, and had said he was “overjoyed” when News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks was arrested.
Included in Mrs Brooks’ criminal trial – at which she was acquitted of phone hacking – was evidence that Prince Harry’s phone had been targeted.
“The Duke was aware throughout this period of the intense interest in his life shown by the media and by Associated, of ‘strange things happening around his phone communications’, of ‘unexplained disclosures of private information’ in Associated’s publications and of journalists from Associated ‘regularly turning up at different locations which you would never expect them to, including South Africa… despite the extreme lengths my security team and I went to in order to protect my security and privacy’”, said ANL’s lawyers.
They argue the Duke “had sufficient knowledge to articulate an inferential case against Associated” before the time limit of a case expired, while Harry claims he only knew he might have a case when he started investigating in 2019.
“The Duke asserts that the ‘bubble burst’ in terms of what he knew in 2020 when he moved to the USA”, continued ANL, adding that Harry says he only realised he could instruct his own legal representation when it was suggested by his barrister, David Sherborne.
In his written submissions, Mr Sherborne says the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday commissioned the “breaking and entry into private property”, illegally intercepted voicemail messages and obtained medical records.
“The claimants each claim that in different ways they were the victim of numerous unlawful acts carried out by the defendant, or by those acting on the instructions of its newspapers, The Daily Mail and The Mail On Sunday”, said Mr Sherborne.
He said alleged unlawful activity includes “illegally intercepting voicemail messages, listening into live landline calls, obtaining private information, such as itemised phone bills or medical records, by deception or ‘blagging’, using private investigators to commit these unlawful information gathering acts on their behalf and even commissioning the breaking and entry into private property”.
“They range through a period from 1993 to 2011, even continuing beyond until 2018,” the barrister added.
Prince Harry was flanked by a security detail and met with a heavy police presence as he arrived at the Royal Courts of Justice in central London at 9.45am, before being led up to a private conference area within the courtroom complex.
Harry was not required to attend court himself for this week’s preliminary hearings, but nonetheless appeared in-person for a legal battle that pitches him once again in opposition to the Daily Mail.
He is sat on the back row of the court, two seats from Frost who has also turned up for the preliminary hearings.
The group of high-profile individuals announced they were suing the newspaper publisher in October last year, with lawyers saying they had “become aware of compelling and highly distressing evidence that they have been the victims of abhorrent criminal activity and gross breaches of privacy.”
In a statement announcing the launch of the legal action, released by Hamlins law firm, it was alleged the unlawful acts included hiring private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside cars and homes and the recording of private phone conversations.
The publisher immediately hit back, describing the allegations as “preposterous smears” and a “pre-planned and orchestrated attempt to drag the Mail titles into the phone-hacking scandal”. A spokesperson for ANL also said the allegations were “unsubstantiated and highly defamatory claims, based on no credible evidence”.
Four days of hearings this week are expected to tackle a bid by ANL – the publishers of the Daily Mail, the Mail on Sunday, and MailOnline – to end the legal claims before they have got off the ground. The publisher is due to ask Mr Justice Nicklin to dismiss the claims without a full civil trial. The Daily Mail and its linked titles has consistently denied unlawful activity by its staff since the phone hacking scandal broke more than a decade ago.
News Group Newspapers has settled multiple claims against it over illegality at the now-defunct News of the World, and it has also settle claims relating to The Sun – without admitting liability at that newspaper.
Mirror Group Newspapers has also been embroiled in long-running civil claims over activities at titles including The People and The Sunday Mirror, admitting liability for widespread phone hacking.
Harry is already locked in another legal battle with ANL over his claim that he was libelled in a report about his security.
In a preliminary ruling this morning, Mr Justice Nicklin imposed a reporting restriction on the names of Mail journalists who are involved in the case.
He said it would be fairer to hear the applications that have been lodged without identifying individuals allegedly involved in illegal activity.
