Prince Harry privacy case brings $13M Daily Mail costs
Prince Harry and six other high-profile figures must pay an initial £9.5 million ($13 million) to Associated Newspapers, the Daily Mail publisher, after losing their prince harry privacy case. A UK High Court judge ordered the payment by August 28, with further legal costs still possible.
Key Takeaways
- Harry, Elton John and five others face an initial $13 million costs order after their failed privacy lawsuit against Associated Newspapers.
- Justice Matthew Nicklin set an August 28 deadline for the £9.5 million payment to the Daily Mail publisher.
- The claimants could still owe roughly another £25 million if the publisher recovers more of its reported £34 million-plus legal bill.
- All 97 claims alleging unlawful information gathering were dismissed in July; the group has until October 2 to decide on an appeal.
Who must pay in the prince harry privacy case?
Alongside Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, the losing claimants include singer Elton John and his husband, film producer David Furnish; anti-racism campaigner Doreen Lawrence; actors Sadie Frost and Elizabeth Hurley; and former Liberal Democrat politician Simon Hughes. Lawrence’s costs are expected to be covered by the others.
They sued Associated Newspapers Limited over alleged unlawful information gathering for stories published between about 1997 and 2015, including claims that private investigators engaged in voicemail interception, phone tapping and “blagging” of sensitive records. In a July 7 judgment after an 11-week High Court trial in London, Justice Matthew Nicklin found the claimants had not proved the publisher obtained the information unlawfully and noted a shortage of evidence across 97 claims.
Why did the court order such a large payment?
In Friday’s written ruling, Nicklin said the claimants’ conduct was “unreasonable to a high degree,” citing the “speculative” nature of the claims and their failure to voluntarily withdraw serious allegations that could no longer be backed up. The court also said the case was pursued “outside the ordinary and reasonable conduct of civil proceedings,” including building it “on an unjustifiably wide canvas.”
Nicklin declined to impose a hard cap on recoverable costs, even while calling the publisher’s estimated bill—about £34.5 million ($47 million)—“exceptionally high” and “excessive.” The initial £9.5 million must be paid by 4 p.m. on August 28 and is only a down payment on what may follow.
According to CNN, the ruling unusually does not require the publisher to prove its costs claim is reasonable first; claimants would have to argue otherwise. Legal commentary noted amounts above a roughly £16 million insurance cap could fall on the claimants personally.
Could Harry and the others owe even more?
Yes. Associated Newspapers has said it spent more than £34 million on the litigation. If it seeks the rest of its costs and wins approval, Harry and the six others could face roughly another £25 million on top of the initial order. Specialist costs judges may still determine the final figure if the sides cannot agree.
Simon Hughes said he was “disappointed and surprised” that recoverable costs were not limited and is considering whether to appeal. The claimants have until October 2 to decide. Associated Newspapers called the outcome an “overwhelming victory for the Mail” and a “devastating critique” of claims that “should never have been brought.”
For more coverage of high-stakes disputes shaping public life and media accountability, see BlasterPost’s Future Tech & AI Wonders hub.