Duke of Sussex & Others vs ANL: thread 4

[bluegreygreen]

This is the fourth thread discussing the case Prince Harry (and 6 others) brought against the Daily Mail (Associated Newspapers Limited; ANL) for alleged unlawful information gathering (UIG).

The claimants are: Prince Harry (PH); Doreen Lawrence (DL); Liz Hurley (EH/LH); Elton John (EJ); David Furnish (DF); Simon Hughes (SH); Sadie Frost (SF).
They are represented by David Sherborne (DS).
The defendant (ANL) is represented by Anthony White (AMW).

The threads to date have been thorough discussions of the evidence (so far as we were able to obtain it), with posters giving links and explaining their views. We have mostly kept things civil by avoiding partisan discussions on specific Royal Family members, and trying not to be derailed from the topic of court proceedings.
The case has concluded and we are now awaiting the judgement from Judge Nicklin.

We have also included (when things slowed with the title case) other cases or discussions with a specific theme of free speech/press freedom, particularly when related to those with money or power preventing others from speaking.

One current ongoing case is that involving @GwendolineFairfax8 - some details towards the end of thread 3.
The case is in court this week and is likely to be reported on at the end of the week.

Links to previous threads

Thread 1

Thread 2

Thread 3

There was limited direct reporting from court after the celebrities gave evidence; what there we followed on this link
Sky news link to court case

If it was any other family, I would agree. However the RF have to put institution first and H and his wife have tried to launch many grenades at it.

Is this breaking embargo @Serenster

You are not supposed to take any action at all based on the draft judgment. Booking a venue for a “victory speech” would be sailing pretty close to the wind, unless they booked it whether or not they won or lost. Harry may well want to give another “This is a travesty” speech, like he did after losing his security judicial review if he loses, however?

The 1 out of 14 sounds suspiciously detailed….

Mild speculation on my part, but one of the Twitter commentators dropped a hint about a good Independence Day/July 4th. Is that just likely to be them hazarding a guess that the judgement would be delivered on the 4th (obv we now know the 7th), or would Harry et al have received them embargoed version today? I assumed not, being Saturday, but am curious about how these things work.

It would surely never have been today.

My understanding is the lawyers involved have seen the judgement but are not permitted to reveal anything about its contents to anyone, let alone the parties involved. So I suspect the “1 in 14” comment is just speculation and an indication from Harry that any kind of win, however small, will be seen as a win (in that it exposes ANL for using UIG, which is what they wanted and will lead to potential further claims).

All I can say is wait until you see what ANL has planned in the event of a whitewash on their favour….

*in their favour

Thanks. So Harry may be assuming he has won, even though people who followed the case, think this is not the most likely outcome.

He really, really doesn’t like being told no, does he.

Can’t wait …. that will be highly entertaining ….. ‘dish best served cold’ and all that.

Early doors so not thinking clearly, therefore musing ‘out loud’ on here so to speak.

Harry says his friends don’t leak.

But we now know, Harry himself leaks, as he has been shown to have a WhatsApp group, with favoured journalists.

Could that alter the judgement, on an appeal basis, if Harry had won on a point, I wonder. I think it was pre WhatsApp days, but not pre phone call, messages.

Or am I being incredibly thick. Not unknown.

That was evidence presented in court so the judge will have taken it into account.

Hey it’s not a problem. I understand why you may have interpreted that way. I am close to the case but definitely not part of the embargo team etc. I await the results tomorrow eagerly as I am sure we all do ❤️

Will the verdict be read out or is it written?

I would like it delivered to me thusly…..on top of a single plum , floating in perfume, served in a Mans hat!

Usually they are uploaded onto the Court’s website.

I believe they're usually written, HoldMyWine, though I suppose they could always get that idiot who dresses up and pretends to be a town crier to bawl the details in front of the palace

I don't imagine the outcome is any secret to the RF now, but the trouble is that, if it doesn't go entirely Harry's way, he's likely to have journos howling questions at him wherever he shows up, and how he'd react remains to be seen

Posted on the PR disaster thread, the judge will deliver his verdict by email at 2pm tomorrow

I have just requested a late lunch, I want to be on here at 2pm 😂

Haha I might do the same!

Two separate sentences: will be sent to the parties by email. Will be handed down at 2pm tomorrow

https://ugc-assets.mumsnet.com/images/202607/large-HQHFypMDZBN9vo9cQ28UzBOiYDkMkqenFpfnFB3k.png

ETA The parties may already know the result.

The judgement will apparently be available at 2pm. I predict the site will go down due to the sheer amount of people trying to download it!

I have to go out tomorrow - I am trying to time it so that it is later in the afternoon!

Sorry, bluegreygreen, but you can't go

You've always been an especially rational voice on here and you're needed!!

I am genuinely interested in peoples predictions regard the judgement tomorrow. I keep going over things that were said in Court. There are particular things that Nicklin said that stick in my mind - ‘without Burrows these claims would fall away and could not be sustained’. ‘Without Burrows, what evidence do you have?’ And ‘It is surprising that there is not one document’ (Judge was referring to evidence ( or lack of it) that the claimants team quite clearly did not have.

Then there is Burrows very clearly stating that he does not support and never did support the claimants which the claimants team have known since 2023 (and chose to push forward regardless)!

Sherborne did not want Burrows in Court and decided to play games when it didn’t suit him (the Judge picked up on this).