Sir Elton John and David Furnish (left) and Prince Harry (right) arrive at the High Court in London on Monday 27 March 2023 for a hearing in their unlawful information gathering action against Mail publisher Associated Newspapers. Pictures: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images and PA Wire/Jordan Pettitt
Prince Harry is expected to appear in court next week to give evidence in his legal action against the publisher of the Daily Mail.
Harry and a group of six others are bringing the claim at the High Court in London, alleging that Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) carried out or commissioned unlawful activities such as hiring private investigators to place listening devices inside cars, “blagging” private records and accessing private phone conversations.
The group includes Sir Elton John, Baroness Doreen Lawrence, former Lib Dem MP Sir Simon Hughes, and actresses Sadie Frost and Liz Hurley.
Harry is expected to give evidence lasting a full day next Thursday (22 January), according to a draft trial timetable seen on Thursday.
Other people expected to give evidence during the nine-week trial include Baroness Lawrence, Sir Elton and Hurley.
A hearing on Thursday dealt with a number of outstanding issues ahead of the trial, which is due to begin on Monday.
This included a challenge by the group’s lawyers against some of the wording in ANL’s proposed opening arguments relating to an alleged “scheme of camouflage”.
The High Court heard that ANL lawyers have made “serious allegations” of dishonesty and fraud against some representatives in the claimants’ legal team.
[ Cash for witnesses: Prince Harry legal team’s tactics revealed ahead of Mail privacy trial ]
David Sherborne, for the claimants, said in written submissions: “The allegations made by the defendants are exceptionally serious, of fraud, dishonesty and professional misconduct.
“They cannot be introduced by assertion in opening written submissions and are not simply commentary on pleaded issues.”
He added: “The allegations made by the defendants are not confined to the credibility of witnesses, as above, the defendant explicitly seeks findings, and also asserts as a fact that actions amount to a ‘calculated attempt to withhold the true position from the court’.”
Antony White KC, for ANL, told the court the submissions were simply an “attack” on the credibility of some of the witnesses.
He said in court: “It is not necessary to plead a case if the other side’s witnesses are not telling the truth.”
Mr Justice Nicklin ruled that ANL’s trial opening note should be amended, saying: “In my judgment, the camouflage scheme that is relied upon by the defendants goes far further than an attack on credibility.”
He added: “It seems to be that the requirements of fairness mean that the defendant must seek to amend its defence.”
White told the court he would condense the claims in his opening note.
Hear more about the case in Press Gazette’s latest podcast: Prince Harry versus tabloids – the final showdown.
Email [email protected] to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our “Letters Page” blog