Prince Harry wants case against Mirror resolved as soon as possible – lawyers

Published January 29,2024

Subscribe

Prince Harry needs London’s High Court to resolve the rest of his lawsuit in opposition to Britain’s Mirror Group Newspapers as quickly as attainable following the ruling in his favour on the finish of final 12 months, his authorized crew stated on Monday.

In December, the High Court dominated that Harry had been a sufferer of phone-hacking and different illegal acts by journalists on the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People tabloids with the information of their editors.

The prince, the primary British royal for 130 years to offer proof in court docket when he appeared as a witness final June, was awarded 140,600 kilos (round $180,700) in damages.

Judge Timothy Fancourt dominated that about half the tales in regards to the Duke of Sussex examined in court docket have been the results of illegal acts. However, the trial solely thought of 33 of 147 articles Harry argues have been obtained unlawfully.

“Although the Duke is certainly prepared to attempt to resolve the remainder of his claim through agreement, it is necessary to list … the trial of the remainder of his claim as soon as is practicable,” his authorized crew stated in a written submission.

Harry’s lawyer, David Sherborne, stated the instructions for trial ought to be made as quickly as attainable, whereas MGN’s attorneys stated of their written submission that provides, whose sum was not disclosed, had been made to the prince to settle.

The bulk of Monday’s listening to was taken up with arguments about authorized prices for final 12 months’s seven-week trial which heard proof from Harry and three others who have been chosen as check circumstances from about 100 claimants.

While Harry’s particular person prices is not going to be handled till his lawsuit is concluded, attorneys representing Harry and different claimants requested for nearly 2 million kilos to cowl the charges for the generic motion taken in opposition to the writer.

Sherborne argued that the lies and cover-ups by MGN, owned by Reach, meant it was liable to cowl these prices.

However, MGN’s attorneys argue the claimants had solely been partly profitable, and stated three others whose circumstances went to trial ought to pay all the prices, as two have been dominated to have made their claims too late and the third had obtained much less in damages than it had supplied in a pre-trial settlement.

Fancourt stated he would give his ruling at a later date.