Prince Harry and a group of high-profile figures have announced their intention to appeal following the dismissal of their privacy claims against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL). A recent court ruling determined that they did not provide sufficient evidence to support allegations of unlawful information gathering pertaining to articles published in the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday between the 1990s and 2011.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(jpeg)/prince-harry-court-012126-1-5d1a7a6cb07f4d12a89d0c5f4b154c57.jpg)
The ruling, delivered in July, was met with disappointment by the claimants, which also included noted personalities such as Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, and Sadie Frost. Their case argued that ANL breached privacy rights by acquiring personal information without consent.
On November 6, a spokesperson for the claimants confirmed that formal applications for appeal had been submitted to the Court of Appeal. The spokesperson stated, “The claimants respectfully disagree with those unprecedented decisions, which they consider to be legally and factually flawed.”
Following the ruling earlier this year, ANL hailed the judgment as a significant victory for both the Daily Mail and press freedom. A spokesperson described it as “an overwhelming victory” that reinforced the integrity of journalism. In stark contrast, Prince Harry and Baroness Doreen Lawrence issued a joint statement rebuking the court’s findings, branding them a “complete and obvious whitewash.”
In their statement, Harry and Lawrence expressed their dissatisfaction, asserting, “We came to Court seeking justice and accountability. But we have received neither.” They voiced concern that the court’s decision seemed to favour the press, highlighting a disparity in the treatment of evidence presented by the claimants against the denials offered by ANL journalists.
The claimants maintained that their evidence was compelling and urged the court to acknowledge inconsistencies within the responses provided by ANL representatives. In a poignant remark, they thanked their legal team and the witnesses who came forward in hopes of achieving justice.
Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, have previously experienced some success in their ongoing battles against UK publishers over privacy violations. Notably, earlier this year, they secured a £1 compensation from the Mail on Sunday after a ruling in their favour regarding the unlawful publication of a personal letter sent by Meghan to her father.
In addition to that case, Harry reached a significant settlement with The Sun’s publisher, which included an eight-figure sum in damages alongside an apology from the outlet for its past unlawful actions.
However, the financial implications from the current privacy case are substantial. Initial legal costs were revealed in August, with the court ordering the claimants to pay an interim amount of £9.54 million by the end of that month. The overall legal expenses are still undetermined, with ANL declaring their costs to be around $45.8 million. This claim was met with scepticism by the claimants’ representatives, who described it as an “eye-watering” overestimation.
The presiding judge, Mr. Justice Nicklin, issued a rare indemnity ruling, obliging the claimants to cover the winning party’s actual legal costs, irrespective of their proportionality to the case. Reports suggest that some of the claimants, including Prince Harry, have insurance to cover a portion of the legal fees. However, it is estimated to provide coverage only for roughly $23.4 million, leaving a significant gap should the final costs be confirmed at the levels declared by ANL.
As the appeal process gets underway, it remains to be seen how the Court of Appeal will respond to the claimants’ submissions. The outcome could have profound implications not only for Harry and his fellow claimants but also within the broader landscape of privacy rights in the media.
About the Author
