Prince Harry Loses Part Of lawsuit But Will Get His Day In Court

LONDON — A High Court judge decided on Thursday that Prince Harry’s case against the owner of the tabloid The Sun can proceed to trial but not for claims of phone hacking.

The judge determined that the case could not address a claim that newspaper executives struck a covert settlement agreement with the royal family.

The Duke of Sussex said that the owner of The Sun and the now-defunct News Of The World illegally gathered information about him over two decades by hacking his phone, hiring investigators, and using trickery.

Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers (NGN) contended that the lawsuit deserved to be dismissed because the claims were made after the six-year statute of limitations.

According to Justice Timothy Fancourt, Harry may have brought his action sooner because he was aware of a phone hacking incident that rocked Britain more than ten years ago. However, the judge decided that the younger son of King Charles III might go forward with charges of further illicit information gathering (UIG), such as paying private investigators to acquire information about him.

“There is no evidence currently before me that the duke knew before the (deadline to file a lawsuit) that NGN had done anything other than hack his mobile phone at the News of the World,” Fancourt stated in his opinion. “Knowing or being on notice of a worthwhile claim for voicemail interception does not by itself amount to knowledge or notice of a worthwhile claim for other forms of UIG.”

Prince Harry loses part of the lawsuit but will get his day in court against The Sun publisher.

On Thursday, a High Court judge decided that Prince Harry’s case against the owner of the tabloid The Sun can proceed to trial but not for claims of phone hacking.

A representative for News Group Newspapers referred to the decision as a “significant victory” that “substantially reduces the scope” of Harry’s legal claim.

The News of the World was the source of the phone hacking controversy in Britain, which was later shown to have extended to other publications. Murdoch shut down News of the World in 2011, apologized unconditionally to victims who were hacked in 2012, and has continued to resolve associated cases. But neither The Sun nor the charges have been acknowledged.

The decision made on Thursday was comparable to one Fancourt made in May in a case brought by actor Hugh Grant, who also had claims of phone hacking dismissed. The cases of Harry and Grant were jointly contested at a hearing in April, and their trial is scheduled to begin in January.

According to attorney Michael Gardner, who is not engaged in the case, most of Harry’s claims were rejected by the judge.

His odds of succeeding on those claims “do not appear good,” said Gardner. “The Duke is pursuing several very pricey privacy cases in the High Court, of which this is just one. If he loses, he might be responsible for millions of pounds in legal fees.

Harry attempted to amend the lawsuit to include charges that a purported secret agreement between Buckingham Palace and Murdoch executives prohibited him from presenting his claims earlier, but the judge rejected both of these efforts. As a result, the judge rejected part of Harry’s lawsuit.

Harry’s attorney had contended that the agreement required a payout and an apology to be hammered out following the conclusion of judicial proceedings in other phone hacking cases.

Prince Harry loses part of the lawsuit but will get his day in court against The Sun publisher.

On Thursday, a High Court judge decided that Prince Harry’s case against the owner of the tabloid The Sun can proceed to trial but not for claims of phone hacking.

Harry asserted that the agreement to save members of the royal family from appearing in court and being questioned about embarrassing voicemails picked up by reporters had been approved by his late grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II. In addition, he claimed to have found out that his heir apparent brother Prince William had been paid a “huge” sum to settle his claims.

Fancourt claimed Harry had not produced any witnesses or documentation to support a covert pact, and the publisher denied any such arrangement.

Buckingham Palace did not answer requests for comment on the reported agreement or settlement with the Prince of Wales.

Last month, Harry defied family tradition by appearing in court as the first senior member of the royal family to do so in more than a century. He testified in a different phone hacking case in which he sued the Daily Mirror’s publishers for 440,000 pounds ($563,000).

The first of Harry’s three trials involving illegal information collecting against British tabloid publishers took place in that case, which was also presided over by Fancourt. The judge’s decision is anticipated later this year.

A different judge is contemplating whether to dismiss a related action brought against the Daily Mail’s publishers.

SOURCE – (AP)