Britain’s Prince Harry and six other high-profile figures have been ordered to pay more than £9.5 million (€11.1 million) to the publisher of the Daily Mail after the first stage of legal costs was decided following their unsuccessful High Court case.
The group, which included singer Elton John, actresses Liz Hurley and Sadie Frost, filmmaker David Furnish and former politician Sir Simon Hughes, had brought legal action against Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL). They alleged that the publisher had engaged in unlawful information-gathering practices.
However, after an 11-week trial at the High Court in London earlier this year, all of the claims were dismissed by Mr Justice Nicklin. The case returned to court this week for a two-day hearing to determine how much the unsuccessful claimants should pay towards ANL’s legal expenses.
The court ordered the group of seven to make an interim payment of £9,544,355 by 28 August. This amount represents an initial contribution towards Associated Newspapers’ costs, with further hearings expected to establish the final total.
During the hearing, the court was told that ANL’s overall legal costs exceeded £34 million (€39.7 million). The publisher had sought an interim payment of more than £9.9 million, while lawyers representing the claimants argued that the appropriate figure should be just over £7.9 million.
Mr Justice Nicklin said the claimants and their advisers had been aware that the court date would be used to determine the payment. He was highly critical of the cases, describing the allegations as “speculative and substantially inferential” and saying they lacked sufficient evidential support.
The judge also ruled that most of Associated Newspapers’ costs should be assessed on an indemnity basis, a decision that is generally more favourable to the successful party and could increase the amount eventually recovered.
ANL welcomed the ruling, describing it as another major victory for the Mail and its journalism. A spokesperson said the decision represented a strong rejection of what the company considered an unjustified attempt to damage the newspaper and the reputations of its journalists, editors and executives.
Lawyers for the claimants had warned that an indemnity costs order could have serious financial consequences, potentially leaving the group without sufficient insurance cover to meet the final bill. Further court proceedings will now determine the total amount they will ultimately be required to pay.
