Prince Harry’s Tabloid Lawsuits: Mirror, Sun, and Daily Mail

Prince Harry’s tabloid lawsuits target the three biggest publishers in British tabloid journalism, and each has landed differently: he won a High Court judgment against Mirror Group Newspapers in December 2023, settled with News Group Newspapers (publisher of The Sun) in January 2025, and is now awaiting a ruling in his case against Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday. Together they form the most sustained legal challenge a member of the British royal family has ever mounted against the press.

The Mirror Group Case: A Win in Court

Harry’s suit against Mirror Group Newspapers, the publisher of The Mirror, Sunday Mirror, and The People, was the first of his tabloid cases to reach a full judgment. He testified at the High Court in June 2023, becoming the first senior British royal to give evidence in court in over 130 years.¹

On December 15, 2023, Mr. Justice Fancourt found that phone hacking and other unlawful information gathering had been “widespread and habitual” at all three Mirror Group titles from 1998 onward. The judge concluded that Harry’s phone was “likely hacked to a modest extent” between 2003 and 2009 and ruled in his favor on 15 of 33 sample articles examined at trial. Harry was awarded £140,600 in damages, including an aggravated component reflecting the publisher’s deliberate concealment of its wrongdoing.²³

The ruling also made findings about who at MGN knew. Justice Fancourt held that CEO Sly Bailey and legal director Paul Vickers had known about phone hacking and concealed it from the board, shareholders, the Leveson Inquiry, and the public. He found that former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan “very likely” knew about at least one instance of unlawful information gathering.³

Rather than appeal, Harry and MGN settled the remaining claims in February 2024. MGN agreed to pay a “substantial additional sum” in damages beyond the court award, plus legal costs, with an initial interim payment of £400,000. An MGN spokesperson said the company had “taken full responsibility and paid compensation” for historical wrongdoing.⁴⁵

The News Group Settlement: An Apology From The Sun

Harry’s action against News Group Newspapers, publisher of The Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, settled on January 22, 2025, days before what would have been an eight-week trial. NGN offered a “full and unequivocal apology” for “serious intrusion” by The Sun between 1996 and 2011, including unlawful activities carried out by private investigators. The apology also covered phone hacking, surveillance, and misuse of private information by individuals working for the News of the World.⁶

NGN agreed to pay “substantial damages.” The BBC reported that the combined settlements for Harry and co-claimant Lord Tom Watson cost the publisher more than £10 million in payouts and legal fees. Harry’s barrister, David Sherborne, called it a “monumental victory.”⁷

The settlement avoided a public airing of allegations that NGN executives had engaged in a corporate-wide cover-up and destroyed over 30 million emails and backup tapes to obstruct police investigations. NGN continued to “strongly deny” those allegations and noted they had been investigated by police and the Crown Prosecution Service between 2012 and 2015 with a finding of “no case to answer.”⁶

The Daily Mail Case: Awaiting Judgment

The remaining case, Prince Harry and others v. Associated Newspapers Limited, was filed at London’s High Court in October 2022. Harry is one of seven claimants, alongside Sir Elton John, David Furnish, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost, Baroness Doreen Lawrence, and former Liberal Democrat MP Sir Simon Hughes.¹

The group accuses the publisher of commissioning private investigators to carry out unlawful information gathering between 1993 and 2011. Specific allegations include hacking mobile phone voicemails, tapping landline telephones, planting listening devices in cars and homes, obtaining confidential medical and financial records through impersonation (a practice known as “blagging”), and paying corrupt police officials for sensitive information.⁸⁹

Associated Newspapers denies every allegation. It has called the claims “preposterous smears,” arguing that its journalists relied on legitimate sources: press officers, publicists, contacts in the claimants’ social circles, and publicly available information. Its lead barrister, Antony White KC, has characterized the lawsuit as a “political campaign” orchestrated by the press reform group Hacked Off and funded in part by opponents of the tabloid press, including the late Max Mosley.¹⁰¹¹

Harry’s Testimony

The trial opened on January 19, 2026, and ran for roughly ten weeks. Estimated legal costs on both sides reached about £40 million (roughly $53.5 million). Harry took the witness stand on January 21, making him the only senior British royal in modern history to testify in court on more than one occasion.¹¹²

His individual claim centers on 14 articles published in the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday between 2001 and 2013, many focused on his then-girlfriend Chelsy Davy. His lawyers argued that each article relied on information obtained through intercepted voicemails, payments to private investigators, and illicit acquisition of flight records and medical data.¹³

Harry described the emotional toll of tabloid intrusion, testifying that it left him “paranoid beyond belief.” He called the defense’s argument that he had no right to privacy “disgusting” and said the Daily Mail had made his wife Meghan’s life “an absolute misery.” He rejected the publisher’s contention that friends or associates had leaked private details: “My social circles were not leaky.” When journalists attributed information to unnamed sources, he said, those labels were used “as a cover to make up quotes” and “disguise the true origin of information.”¹⁴¹²

The Defense

Two Daily Mail journalists were central to Harry’s individual claims: Katie Nicholl, a former Mail on Sunday royal correspondent, and Rebecca English, the Daily Mail‘s royal editor. Both denied wrongdoing. Nicholl maintained she sourced her stories from legitimate contacts, including the late journalist Garth Gibbs, who she said had connections to friends of Chelsy Davy. English denied ever using private investigator Mike Behr for unlawful information gathering, even though an email from Behr containing Davy’s flight details was presented in court. The publisher maintained that Behr’s information was “never asked for and it was never acted upon.”¹⁵¹⁶

The defense argued that dozens of experienced journalists were willing to appear in court and submit to cross-examination, which would be unlikely if they had actually engaged in the criminal conduct alleged. Former editor Paul Dacre was among those scheduled to give evidence in defense of the newspapers’ editorial culture.¹⁵

The Gavin Burrows Reversal

The trial’s most dramatic moment involved private investigator Gavin Burrows, whose 2021 witness statement had been a cornerstone of the claimants’ case. In that statement, attributed to Burrows, he allegedly confessed to hacking voicemails, tapping landlines, and obtaining private information by deception on behalf of a Mail on Sunday journalist. It identified the seven claimants as “a small handful of my targets.”¹⁷

When Burrows took the stand on March 23, 2026, as the trial’s final witness, he reversed course. He testified that the 2021 statement was “a fake,” that his signature had been forged, and that the lawsuit was “based on a pack of lies.” He denied ever working for or being paid by Associated Newspapers.¹⁸

Sherborne was granted permission to treat Burrows as a hostile witness and suggested he had “switched sides” after falling out with Graham Johnson, a former phone hacker turned investigative researcher who had been helping to build the claimants’ case. Johnson testified that he had paid Burrows a total of £75,000 for notes, commentary, and work on a memoir, funded primarily by Max Mosley. Burrows called Johnson a “proven conman.” Sherborne argued in closing submissions that Burrows’ forgery claims were “hopeless” and “frankly risible,” and said there was “plenty of hard evidence” of Associated Newspapers using other private investigators independent of anything Burrows had said.¹⁹²⁰²¹

Closing Arguments and Where the Case Stands

In closing submissions at the end of March 2026, Sherborne invited the court to award “substantial damages, including aggravated damages,” arguing the publisher had maintained a systematic culture of using private investigators for illegal activity. He pointed to documentary evidence including payment records to investigative firms and the email from Mike Behr containing Davy’s flight details.²²

White countered that the Burrows evidence, which had originally prompted several claimants to join the suit, had “effectively fallen away,” and with it the foundation of the case. He argued the remaining claims were “without any foundation” and that Harry was “inclined to see unlawful evidence gathering, in particular voicemail interception, everywhere.” White also raised a statute-of-limitations defense, arguing some claimants had knowledge of potential claims years before filing.¹¹²³

The trial concluded on March 31, 2026. Mr. Justice Matthew Nicklin told the parties that “judgment will take some time” and that after an Easter break he would be working on it “effectively full-time.” No date for the ruling has been announced. Unlike MGN and NGN, Associated Newspapers has never acknowledged any wrongdoing.¹⁰

Why Harry Is Suing

Harry has framed the litigation as personal. He has repeatedly tied his campaign to the 1997 death of his mother, Princess Diana, who died in a car crash while being pursued by paparazzi, and told the court that media organizations had broken promises to reform their behavior after her death. His perspective shifted, he testified, when coverage of Meghan Markle grew “vicious” and “racist” after their relationship became public in late 2016. “I think it’s fundamentally wrong to put us through this again when all we required is an apology and some accountability,” he told the court.¹²²⁴

In a 2019 statement regarding an earlier action against the Mail on Sunday, he wrote: “I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.” In an ITV interview, he described curbing the British press as his “life’s mission.”²⁴²⁵

The cases also sit within a broader reckoning that began in 2011, when The Guardian reported that the News of the World had illegally accessed the voicemails of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler. That revelation led to the closure of the 168-year-old tabloid, the Leveson Inquiry into press ethics, and criminal convictions of journalists and editors. Illegal information gathering was later found to have been widespread at multiple publications beyond the Murdoch titles, including Mirror Group titles.²⁶

Justice Nicklin’s forthcoming ruling in the Associated Newspapers case will decide whether the publisher of the Daily Mail joins MGN and NGN in being held to account, or whether the last of Harry’s tabloid lawsuits ends in a loss.

1
CNN. Prince Harry Tabloid Privacy Trial
2
Judiciary.uk. Duke of Sussex v MGN Judgment Press Summary
3
Variety. Prince Harry Lawsuit The Mirror Hacking
4
The Guardian. Prince Harry Settles Rest of Mirror Group Phone-Hacking Claims
5
Reuters. Prince Harry Accepts Substantial Damages to Settle Mirror Group Case
6
The Guardian. Prince Harry Says Sun Publisher Made Historic Admission as He Settles Case
7
BBC. Prince Harry Settles Case Against News Group Newspapers
8
Reuters. Prince Harry, Elton John Take on Daily Mail
9
Sky News. Prince Harry’s Court Case: What’s Happened So Far
10
U.S. News & World Report. Ruling in Prince Harry Case Against Daily Mail Will Take Some Time
11
Press Gazette. Harry Privacy Trial Part of Hacked Off Political Campaign, Says Mail
12
ABC News. Prince Harry to Testify in Privacy Case Against UK Tabloids
13
The Independent. Harry Natalie Pinkham Mail Court
14
NBC News. Prince Harry Testifies Against Daily Mail Publisher
15
The Guardian. Prince Harry Daily Mail Publisher Associated Court
16
The Guardian. Missing Private Investigator Evidence in Daily Mail’s Case Stark, High Court Told
17
BBC. Private Investigator Evidence in Prince Harry Case
18
Reuters. Witness in Prince Harry Media Lawsuit Says Key Statement Was Forged
19
The Guardian. Researcher Paid People for Testimony About Daily Mail, High Court Told
20
Press Gazette. Signature on Crucial Prince Harry Privacy Case Statement Forged, Says Private Eye
21
The Guardian. Daily Mail Associated Newspapers Accusers Induced to Sue, Court Told
22
Courthouse News Service. Prince Harry Lawyers Call for Substantial Damages From UK Tabloids
23
LBC. Prince Harry Trial Damages Publisher
24
Newsweek. Prince Harry: Media Betrayed Promises After Princess Diana’s Death
25
The Guardian. Prince Harry Dislikes the Tabloid Press
26
The Guardian. News of the World: 10 Years Since Phone-Hacking Scandal Brought Down Tabloid