Prince Harry’s phone hacking case against The Sun’s publisher and claim of ‘secret agreement’ between Buckingham Palace and the Press is thrown out by a judge – but other claims against paper will go to trial
Prince Harry’s phone hacking case against The Sun’s publisher and claim of ‘secret agreement’ between Buckingham Palace and the Press is thrown out by a judge – but other claims against paper will go to trial
PRINCE Harry’s evidence was ruled ‘implausible’ as his phone-hacking claim against The Sun was thrown out yesterday.
A High Court judge said there was ‘a lack of credibility’ about the duke’s claims.
And Mr Justice Fancourt dismissed as improbable Harry’s story that Buckingham Palace had struck a secret deal behind his back. He said the Duke of Sussex had signed two ‘statements of truth’ that were ‘inconsistent’ with his evidence.
His excoriating 40-page judgment is believed to be the first time the evidence of a senior royal has been tested in this way.
Beneath the crest of Harry’s father the King at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, Mr Justice Fancourt ruled that the duke’s case had ‘not reached the necessary threshold of plausibility and cogency’.
The duke, 38, is suing News Group Newspapers (NGN), publisher of The Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, alleging phone hacking and other unlawful activities were used to write stories about him. Yesterday, the phone-hacking elements of the case were thrown out after the publisher successfully argued Harry had left it too late to bring his case.
By law, claimants must launch a case within six years, and the judge said there was ‘no doubt’ the duke had known as long ago as 2012 that he had been hacked by the News of the World.
Prince Harry outside the High Court in June to give evidence against Mirror Group Newspapers. He lost his phone hacking claim against The Sun today
While Harry’s phone hacking claims have been dismissed, the High Court judge granted him the right to continue suing the newspaper for other alleged illegal activity to find information for stories
NGN hailed the ruling as ‘a significant victory’ – but it still faces a trial scheduled for January on the other aspects of the case, which Harry’s lawyer David Sherborne claimed were ‘the majority’ of the allegations. When NGN tried to have the whole case thrown out as being too late, Harry responded first by saying he had found out only recently about the hacking so could not have brought it sooner.
Then he said he would have brought it earlier but for a backroom ‘secret agreement’ between Buckingham Palace and newspaper executives, which meant he had been blocked by royal courtiers in 2012 from launching a claim.
This prompted the judge to question how Harry could simultaneously claim he did not know, while also insisting he had been blocked.
NGN’s barrister, Anthony Hudson KC, claimed Harry was trying to ride two horses going in opposite directions and described his belated explanation as ‘Alice in Wonderland stuff’.
After a hearing to get to the bottom of the ‘secret agreement’, Mr Justice Fancourt listed a series of ‘problems’ with the duke’s case.
He said there was ‘nothing other than his rather vague and limited evidence’ to support a secret deal, no documentary evidence of it, and ‘no evidence from those acting for the Royal Family at the time who might have been expected to support his account’.
Prince Harry’s lawyer David Sherborne arrived at the High Court today ahead of the judgment
Harry’s own stated case, which was ‘twice supported by statements of truth’, was ‘inconsistent’ with his evidence to the court, and also with evidence he had given in another case he is pursuing, against the publisher of the Mail, the judge found.
There was a ‘lack of credibility’ in the duke’s claims and an ‘improbability of a secret agreement being made’. The judge said it was ‘surprising’ that Harry had not remembered the supposed secret deal when he was putting together his case.
And he said Harry could ‘easily’ have found out he had a worthwhile case years ago had he exercised ‘reasonable diligence’.
Despite the setback to the prince, the rest of his case will continue to trial, with The Sun facing serious claims that it used private eyes to snoop on the fifth in line to the throne.
Yesterday the judge said both sides had won victories so far, and should each bear their own costs up to now.
But Harry has also been ordered to pay towards the future costs of the newspaper’s lawyers, who face extra work to respond to the fact that the duke must now amend his case in the light of yesterday’s ruling.
