Harry, Elton John and others take Daily Mail publisher to High Court

Prince Harry returned to the Royal Courts of Justice as a landmark nine-week privacy trial opened against Associated Newspapers Ltd, the publisher of the Daily Mail. He is the lead claimant in a group action brought in 2022 alongside Sir Elton John, David Furnish, actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost, campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence, and former MP Sir Simon Hughes. The litigants allege systematic unlawful information gathering by the publisher across decades.

Court filings and reporting set out a catalogue of alleged practices spanning roughly 1993 to 2011, with some claimants contending unlawful activity persisted into the late 2010s. The allegations encompass phone-hacking, live wire-tapping, the bugging of homes, placing listening devices in cars, burglary and "blagging", obtaining private records by deception. Among the specific examples cited are claims that freelance reporters and private detectives were used to obtain flight records for Harry’s former girlfriend Chelsy Davy, with a reported April 2006 search said to have been used to enable photographer ambushes. Lawyers also say stories about Elizabeth Hurley and her then-partner Hugh Grant will be examined.

The lead counsel for the claimants is David Sherborne, who criticised ANL’s denials in court as a "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil defence." Associated Newspapers has strongly denied wrongdoing in public statements and court filings, calling the allegations "preposterous smears" and dismissing the litigation as a "fishing expedition." ANL has stressed that, unlike publishers previously implicated in the phone-hacking scandal, it has not been publicly exposed as engaging in those practices.

The trial timetable indicates Prince Harry will give evidence on Thursday of the opening week and is expected to spend a full day on the stand. Several other claimants will give testimony at points across the nine weeks. Opening submissions and witness examinations will probe contemporaneous communications, agent and reporter activity, and documentary records that could corroborate alleged unlawful methods.

This case arrives amid a continuing reckoning over tabloid behaviour and journalistic boundaries in Britain. Prince Harry’s prior litigation against News Group Newspapers and Mirror Group Newspapers resulted in admissions of wrongdoing, apologies and damages, setting legal precedent the claimant team cites as context. The current proceedings will test whether ANL’s newspapers "truly sailed through the phone-hacking era without touching the water," a framing reflected in court submissions and commentary.

Beyond individual redress, the trial carries industry and cultural consequences. A finding of systemic intrusion would amplify reputational and financial risks for a major publisher and could accelerate newsroom compliance reforms, shift investigative practices and alter commercial relationships with advertisers and agencies wary of association with legal exposure. For claimants such as Baroness Lawrence, who represents a public campaign against racial injustice, the case also raises questions about unequal exposure to intrusive reporting and the responsibilities of press institutions toward victims and campaigners.

Whatever the verdict, the proceedings will be a high-profile legal measure of how British press practices from the 1990s through the 2010s are judged today. The evidence heard over nine weeks will shape public debate about privacy, press freedom and the commercial pressures that have driven aggressive newsgathering.