LONDON 08 July (UNIPA News)-The UK High Court has dismissed a privacy lawsuit brought by Prince Harry and six other claimants against Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail, ruling that they failed to prove allegations of unlawful information gathering.
The claimants, including Prince Harry and singer Elton John, alleged that Associated Newspapers obtained private and confidential information through illegal methods such as phone hacking, the use of private investigators, bugging homes and vehicles, and accessing bank accounts. The publisher consistently denied all allegations.
In a written judgment issued on Tuesday, Mr Justice Nicklin said the claimants had “failed to prove their pleaded allegations.” He ruled that the court could not infer unlawful conduct solely because information was private or because the publisher could not fully explain how it had been obtained.
The judgment stated that suspicion alone was insufficient to establish liability and that the claimants were required to provide evidence demonstrating that the disputed information had been obtained unlawfully. The court also accepted lawful explanations offered by Associated journalists regarding the sourcing of the articles in question.
Justice Nicklin further dismissed allegations that three senior Associated Newspapers executives had provided false evidence during the 2011–2012 Leveson Inquiry into press ethics and practices.
Following the ruling, an Associated Newspapers spokesperson described the outcome as an “overwhelming victory for the Daily Mail and its journalists” and a “magnificent vindication” of the newspaper’s journalism. The company also rejected claims involving bugging, phone tapping, and illicit access to bank accounts as “lurid” and “preposterous,” stating that no credible evidence had been presented during the proceedings.
The publisher said it had incurred legal costs exceeding £50 million and intends to seek recovery of those expenses.
Prince Harry criticized the decision, describing it as “totally unwarranted” and a “whitewash.” In a joint statement with fellow claimant Doreen Lawrence, he said the ruling was “a complete and obvious whitewash,” adding that the outcome, while disappointing, was not entirely unexpected.
