Duke of Sussex & Others vs ANL: thread 6

[bluegreygreen]

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

Judgement was handed down by Judge Nicklin on 7th July 2026.
All claims were dismissed.
Links to the summary and full judgement are below.
We are currently awaiting decisions around costs, following the Consequentials hearing on 29-30th July.

The threads to date were thorough discussions of the evidence (so far as we were able to obtain it), with posters giving links and explaining their views.
Following the judgement, we discussed the judgement itself, the reaction, statements made by different parties and ongoing relevant issues.

We have mostly kept things civil by avoiding more general discussion on Royal Family members, which can become partisan, and trying not to be derailed from the main topic of the thread.

We have occasionally 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.

Links to previous threads
Thread 1
Thread 2
Thread 3
Thread 4
Thread 5

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

Summary judgement

Full judgement

Goodness me. The judge wasn't very impressed, was he?

The problem they had was that you need evidence to win a case. Not liking the other side isn't enough.

Well 😳

I knew it would be bad, but I didn’t think it would be this bad 😬🫣

But the mere fact of him being very rich doesn’t mean that he will be willing to pay the lions share. And why should he? The other claimants didn’t enter in to this with a gun to their head. As they are joint and severally liable he may find that he has to pay a larger share, but I can’t imagine he would
be very happy about. Or that he wouldn’t complain very loudly. I have no sympathy for anyone who thinks they can use the courts for a pay day, which I’m fairly sure is what some of the claimants were envisioning, and equally I don’t think they should
be relying on one of their fellow claimants to bail them out

Which was wise - see the judge's comments posted up thread. TLDR he said that as it was only two of them that made the unwise statement he was setting that aside and made his judgement on all the other matters.

If they had all put their name to it could it have been even worse for them? I mean I'm not sure there is an "even worse" outcome at this stage.

I feel so sorry for Stephen Wright and his family (who are women of colour). He has been maligned by the same woman who maligned the London Fire Brigade post-Grenfell, who maligned her husband who went through the same loss that she did, and who maligned the idea of a free press. That she's a parliamentarian is deeply troubling.

I hope he now feels vindicated, but the stress of all this, and how it could have turned out, will always affect him.

If ANL costs are £34 million and their own costs are £20million then how are they going to scrape together over £10million each?

I thought my credit card bill was bad but this….

I wonder if they go against their legal advisors for failure to do their job or negligence? They should have been advised throughout, about the prospects of success or not.

If the insurers bail out I'd say there's every chance of us hearing about it, ShamedBySiri - though naturally not from them

As for the judge "setting aside" the horrendous post-case statement, I doubt that will weigh with Harry, who'll doubtless believe the costs judgment was made to spite him and is yet another establishment stitch up

Not what I asked - I asked why the private investigator ledgers were not allowed as evidence

Each of them is responsible for the £10m, so Elton can't refuse to pay it as he's liable for it all, as are each of them. It will come down to if they can agree who pays what, and if they don't agree to share it then it may fall to Elton or Harry to pay to avoid ANL launching enforcement action.

Puts my overdraft of £80 in perspective!

They should have been advised throughout, about the prospects of success or not.

Advisers can advise, but they can't force their clients to take that advice.

That's why Harry's going back home to grovel from the King.

Honestly not sure why Meghan is going along with the charade. In her shoes, I'd be livid about the humiliation. She's going back to Britain which everyone knows she hates, she's going to get relentlessly dragged in the press, W&K hate her, her children no longer have the anonymity from the USA and her business prospects are dead in the water.

The more realistic outcome would have been a divorce and Harry returns to the UK to deal with his own debt. Not sure how dragging the wife and kids along sounded like the better option.

You'll have to read the judgement to find out. Possibly because the judge saw the ledgers as a trawling expedition rather than having any value as evidence of one of the specific claims being advanced. But that's just a guess.

Given subsequent events, I'd say this was the final straw for the Palace.

Well, there's no way for her to avoid being involved in H's financial woes whether they now divorce or stay together.

Anyway, 'for richer, for poorer' as the marriage service goes.

Hopefully she's on board because they love each other. Theirs is the love story to end all love stories, remember, they love boldly, or fiercely, or foxily, or something like that.

It was a response to your third paragraph. I'm not a legal expert, but there are people on the thread who are and I'm sure will be happy to respond to your first two paragraphs.

Important point about protecting reputation over cash - “they take a lifetime to build and a moment to shatter”

But if Elton pays Harry's bill then it leaves Harry with more money to keep on attacking the AIDS/HIV charity Sentebale in and out of court, and Elton passionately supports AIDS/HIV charities and organisations. That's how and why he was close to Diana in the first place, and how and why Diana became a gay icon.

Harry's Sentebale fuck-up came about long after Elton and Harry were once friends and had agreed to pursue ANL for a settlement. I can only imagine that things are very different now between the two men.

I think as well other papers admitted wrongdoing during Levenson. So cases were about what they’d done not if they’d done it. ANL admitted no such thing hence the “levenson lies” parts of the judgement.

The other news groups, sun, NOTW, mirror group all admitted illegal activity at the levison inquiry opening an avalanche of claims against them, mostly settled out of court.
ANL did not admit illegal activity, quite the opposite so we're never going to settle this case as they knew they had done nothing wrong.

Meg's ok, she's being allowed to save face with a walk-on voice role that Camilla got for her in The Archers.

Scene: The Ambridge Village Shop
<shop bell pings>
Today's volunteer shopkeeper: Hullo, missy, may I help you?
American tourist: Oh, hiiii. I'm just passing through and wondered if you sell ... jam?
Volunteer shopkeeper: Yes, we do. It's on that shelf, yes, there.
American tourist: My husband loves raspberry jam.
Volunteer shopkeeper: That'll be £2.50 please.
American tourist: Thank you. Bye!

BAFTA nominations incoming.

I think your more realistic outcome is exactly what’s happening right before our eyes - not sure that PH is even aware that MM is returning the faulty goods directly and gently to his home nest with the intention that once he is safely ensconced and enmeshed with his friends, family and culture she will divorce him without having the sulky, raging ex hanging around bothering her in Cali. The fact that their UK return announcement bothers to proactively declare that MM will be leading her businesses from their international residences inadvertently gives the game away.

Thanks everyone for links. Just catching up.

So no cap on costs.
Claimants and ANL to agree costs.
If they can’t agree costs then it’s over to a Costs Team to work out the costs - that could make it even more expensive😱

I don’t think even EJ has £9.5m sitting in an account. I hope they used the intervening time since the judgement to start releasing funds from investments.

What I could see is EJ loaning the money to other claimants and being paid back over a period of years.