Prince Harry leaves the High Court after giving evidence in London on June 7, 2023. Photo / AP
Prince Harry leaves the High Court after giving evidence in London on June 7, 2023. Photo / AP
The Duke of Sussex will pursue a second High Court hacking trial against Mirror Group Newspapers if he is not awarded appropriate damages following his “overwhelmingly successful” High Court victory against the publisher.
Prince Harry wants another trial “as soon as possible” unless the newspaper group meets hisfinancial demands, the High Court in Britain heard.
The Duke sued the newspaper group over 148 articles he alleged had been obtained illegally, saying when he gave evidence last June, that he was motivated by a desire to protect his wife, Meghan.
He was awarded £140,600 ($291,444) in damages after the judge found that 15 of 33 articles selected for examination at trial were the product of phone-hacking or unlawful information-gathering.
The ruling, handed down in December, prompted the Duke to hail himself a “dragon-slayer” as he vowed to continue his crusade against the tabloid press.
As the case returned to the High Court yesterday NZT, it emerged that no agreement had been made concerning potential damages for the outstanding 115 stories comprising his claim.
They include reports about his late mother, Diana, Princess of Wales; his relationship with Chelsy Davy, his former girlfriend; and his military career, which he believes were obtained illegally.
Prince Harry was motivated by a desire to protect his wife, Meghan Markle, when he gave evidence in the High Court last June. Photo / Getty Images
It emerged in court that MGN had offered to settle his claim pre-trial.
Only a quarter of the Duke’s case has been determined
Roger Mallalieu, KC, for MGN, revealed in court documents that “offers have been made” to Prince Harry but insisted that the terms remained secret.
David Sherborne, the Duke’s barrister, suggested that although attempts would be made to resolve the remainder of his claim through agreement, his client was prepared to return to the witness box if necessary.
He pointed out that only a quarter of his case had been determined, with 115 articles still to be tried.
“Although the Duke is certainly prepared to attempt to resolve the remainder of his claim through agreement, it is necessary to list of the trial of the remainder of his claim as soon as is practicable, in order that his claim, which was issued almost four-and-a-half years ago in September 2019, may be fully determined if agreement is not reached,” he said.
The barrister said a further trial would likely take up to 10 days, depending on the number of witnesses called by MGN.
He told Mr Justice Fancourt the Duke wanted a new trial “as soon as possible”. He added in court documents: “There is no reason why the Duke’s claim should wait until determination of any appeal, which would not affect his claim”.
Both MGN and the Duke agreed that his costs should be reserved pending resolution on the outstanding articles.
But Sherborne demanded almost £2 million ($4.15 million) from MGN towards the legal costs of bringing “generic” allegations to court.
Prince Harry's barrister, David Sherborne, reads a written statement on behalf of his legal client following the ruling in his favour in a lawsuit against the Mirror Group on December 15, 2023, in London, England. Photo / Getty Images
Other claimants left with huge legal fees
The Duke’s case was heard alongside similar claims brought by Michael Turner, the Coronation Street actor who is known professionally as Michael Le Vell, actress Nikki Sanderson, and Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse.
Sanderson and Wightman’s claims were dismissed because they were made too late, despite the judge finding that some of their complaints were proved, leaving them facing massive legal bills.
Sanderson, it emerged, rejected a £160,000 ($331,596) settlement offer.
MGN said the unsuccessful claimants should make interim payments of 90 per cent of its costs. It is seeking an interim payment of almost £96,000 ($198,957) from Wightman and £110,000 ($227,988) from Sanderson.
Turner was awarded £31,650 ($65,598) in damages after the judge ruled his case was “proved only to a limited extent”.
The publisher, however, said Turner should also pay its costs after rejecting a £50,000 ($103,631) settlement offer that he failed to beat at trial.
Any argument to the contrary was “fanciful”, Mallalieu told the court. MGN is seeking an interim payment of almost £109,000 ($225,956) from Turner.
The barrister said MGN had repeatedly denied both the scale of unlawful information-gathering and the level of board and legal department knowledge and then “fiercely resisted” disclosure.
“The defendant denied the case wholesale,” he added. “There has to be a consequence to that.”
He said there was a “plain and overwhelming case” for the claimants to recover costs “because we were the overall winners quite clearly”.
He added: “We were overwhelmingly successful and that justifies an issue-based costs order”.
Sherborne has asked for an interim payment of almost £2 million ($4.15m) for common costs to be paid by MGN. The judge said he would hand down his costs ruling at a later date.
