Nicolai Haugsted
Prince Harry’s courtroom setback grows as publisher demands millions.
Prince Harry’s legal battle against the publisher of the Daily Mail may have taken an even more expensive turn after lawyers argued he and his fellow claimants should be ordered to cover almost the entire cost of the newspaper group’s defence.
The latest hearing at London’s High Court focused not on whether the claimants had won or lost—that question has already been decided—but on how much they should now be required to pay after their privacy claims were dismissed.
Newspaper group seeks £10 million upfront
Earlier this month, the High Court rejected claims brought by Harry, Elton John and five other public figures, who alleged that Associated Newspapers had relied on unlawful methods, including phone hacking, to obtain private information.
Judge Matthew Nicklin ruled that the claimants had failed to prove those allegations, writing that suspicion alone was insufficient to establish their case.
Now, according to Reuters, Associated Newspapers is asking the court to order the claimants to pay legal costs on an indemnity basis, meaning the losing side would be expected to reimburse the publisher without the usual requirement that the costs be shown to be proportionate.
According to the publisher, its legal bill has reached £34.5 million, while the claimants’ insurance policy covers only £16 million.
Associated is also seeking an interim payment of £10 million.
Harry’s comments criticized in court
Representing Associated Newspapers, lawyer Antony White sharply criticized both the legal case and Harry’s public response after the ruling.
White argued the claimants had pursued sweeping allegations without sufficient evidence, describing the litigation as a deliberate attempt to create “a banquet of litigation” against the publisher.
He also took aim at Harry’s statement describing the judgment as “a complete and obvious whitewash.”
“It was entirely inappropriate and unreasonable.”
White argued that the prince had misused both his public profile and celebrity status through those comments.
Claimants call legal bill ‘eye-watering’
Lawyers acting for Harry and the other claimants disputed the scale of the costs being sought.
Nicholas Bacon described Associated’s £34.5 million legal bill as “eye-watering,” arguing it vastly exceeded the budget previously agreed during the proceedings.
He also pointed to reports suggesting the publisher wanted “to go for the jugular” by pursuing indemnity costs to make an example of the claimants.
Instead of the £10 million sought by Associated, the claimants have offered an interim payment of £8 million, which they propose paying by August 28.
Appeal decision still pending
Any attempt to challenge Judge Nicklin’s ruling has been put on hold until the court decides the dispute over legal costs.
Proceedings are scheduled to continue on Thursday, when the High Court will hear further arguments over how much Harry and the other claimants should ultimately be ordered to pay.
