Prince Harry will stop at nothing even at the expense of his own family: extremely tur…

Prince Harry’s trial against News Group Newspapers (NGN) could have far reaching consequences, far beyond the two-month trial that begins tomorrow.

The Duke of Sussex is suing the publishers of The Sun, and the now defunct News of the World, over allegations of unlawful information gathering.

NGN has previously admitted to allegations of phone hacking at the News of the World, but has always denied allegations against The Sun.

Phone hacking allegations will not form part of Prince Harry’s case, because the court previously ruled that he had been too late in bringing this part of his claim.

Until now, any previous litigation against The Sun has been settled out of court (without NGN accepting any liability), which has reportedly cost NGN around £1 billion -including legal costs.

This means NGN has previously avoided any of these cases going to trial in an open court room (citing the decision made commercial sense), but Prince Harry and former deputy leader of the Labour Party, Lord Tom Watson, have refused to settle.

This suggests both men are determined to have their day in court, despite the enormous financial burden.

Actor Hugh Grant, who was previously determined to go to trial with similar allegations against NGN, settled out of court last year because the legal costs to him personally could have been around £10 million – even if the judge found in his favour.

In that scenario, if the award of financial damages was a penny less than NGN previously offered to settle, Grant would have been forced to pay the legal costs of both sides – something he was not willing to do.

Prince Harry, and Tom Watson, are in the same position; their insistence of taking their case to trial suggests they are willing to take this risk.
Alternatively, they may feel confident that they will beat any previous offer made by NGN – assuming the media giant has previously tried to settle.

In The Duke of Sussex’s case, he’s not interested in a financial settlement; it’s about ‘accountability.
The King’s son sees it as his life’s mission to hold powerful media executives to account, and change public opinion around tabloid media giants.

When he won his separate case against Mirror Group Newspapers back in 2023, he called on the Metropolitan Police to launch criminal investigations – they have so far not done so.

This is why his case against NGN could have far reaching consequences; allegations of coverups from those at the top of the food chain are likely to be heard in open court.

This could include current CEO of News UK, Rebekah Brookes, who was found not guilty of conspiracy to hack voicemails in 2014, as well as two counts of conspiracy to pay public officials and two counts of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

The current CEO of The Washington Post, Will Lewis, could also be in the firing line – who’s been accused of shielding evidence from police investigating phone hacking more than a decade ago.

Both executives deny any wrongdoing.

Australian-born media mogul, Rupert Murdoch, is also likely to be mentioned as the head of the global media empire.
So what exactly is Prince Harry accusing News Group Newspapers of?

He alleges information in around 200 articles about him came from unlawful sources, but only about 30 are expected to be examined in detail at trial.

The articles date from 1996 – 2011: arguably a very turbulent part of his life.

In that period, Harry’s mother was killed in a car crash, and the ‘highs and lows’ of his past relationship with ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy were regularly splashed across the front pages.

In their defence, NGN are expected to argue The Prince is bringing his allegations to court far too late.

Adding to the drama, NGN’s lawyers want Prince Harry to answer their questions in the dock for four days, cross-examining in detail every bit of information within the articles he alleges came from dodgy sources.

Having watched Prince Harry in the dock for two days in his separate case against The Mirror, this is not something Harry looked particularly comfortable with, and often stumbled over the details.

Despite this, he did win his case and performed far better in Day 2 of cross-examination than he did on Day 1.

This trial could be particularly uncomfortable for the Royal Family; in pre-trial hearing’s, Harry’s lawyers claimed Prince William had secretly settled his phone-hacking claim with NGN for a “very large sum”.

This, I would suggest, is something The Prince of Wales wanted to remain private – Kensington Palace has not commented.

Prince Harry has had an extremely turbulent relationship with his family, and conceded last year his public fight with the British tabloids was a “central part” of it.

There may be concerns within royal circles that further private details about the relationship between the Royal Family and the press could be made public by Prince Harry in open court.

This will not help him mend relationships with his close family members.

Prince Harry, I would suggest, is willing to make the financial, personal, and family sacrifice.

For the “greater good”, he has previously disclosed in a TV interview that he wants to hold powerful executives to account on behalf of all alleged victims of phone hacking and unlawful information gathering – describing it as a “David vs Goliath” moment.

Whether the judge rules in Prince Harry’s favour or not, The Duke could stand to lose millions of pounds.

For News Group Newspapers, their reputation, and that of former and current executives, are on the line.

Could a win for Harry spark another Leveson-style inquiry into unlawful information gathering?

The previous Conservative government abandoned plans for the second stage of the inquiry into press standards.
Could the Metropolitan Police also be motivated to reopen criminal investigations?

The truth is that it is far too early to say; the trial is expected to last two months and the judge (Mr Justice Fancourt) is expected to take a long time to reach his conclusion.

The high-profile civil trial, and fallout, is going to be very messy – regardless of the outcome.

A spokesperson for News Group Newspapers said: “In 2011 an apology was published by NGN to victims of voicemail interception by the News of the World. The company publicly committed to paying financial compensation and since then has paid settlements to those with claims. In some cases, particularly those relating to The Sun, it has made commercial sense (and in accordance with common litigation practice) for the parties to come to a financial settlement without NGN accepting liability.

“These civil proceedings have been running for many years and concern only historical events from between 14 and 29 years ago.

“There are two outstanding cases which have not managed to come to a resolution and are proceeding to trial [this week], relating to Lord Watson of Wyre Forest and the Duke of Sussex.

“Lord Watson makes allegations of unlawful information gathering and phone hacking concentrating on the period 2009-2011. NGN strongly denies that any of its titles hacked Mr Watson or acted unlawfully and will also argue his claim is brought out of time.

“The Duke alleges unlawful information gathering from 1996-2011. His allegations of mobile phone hacking have been struck out by the court so will not be part of the trial. His claim focuses now on allegations of unlawful information gathering by enquiry agents and alleged private investigators instructed by NGN journalists mainly in the early 2000s. His claim will be fully defended, including on the grounds that it is brought out of time.

“Both claimants allege unlawful destruction of emails by News International between 2010-2011. This allegation is wrong, unsustainable, and is strongly denied. NGN will be calling a number of witnesses including technologists, lawyers and senior staff to defeat the claim.

“NGN’s case will involve a range of relevant witnesses to defend the case, including current and former employees. The trial is running within a very strict time scale from the Court and we are calling the witnesses we believe will be sufficient to defend the allegations within the timescale set by the Court.

“NGN are represented by Clare Montgomery KC, Anthony Hudson KC and Ben Silverstone instructed by Clifford Chance.