Prince Harry and other high-profile figures reportedly sought to reach a settlement with the Daily Mail publisher just weeks before the multi-million pound legal action began.
Representatives for the group approached Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) in a bid strike an agreement ahead of the Duke giving evidence at trial, reports suggest.
But the deal was rejected outright by lawyers for ANL, according to reports in The Times.
In the bombshell judgment handed down on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled all articles published by Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) had not been based on unlawful information gathering.
The Duke of Sussex alleged 14 articles published by the newspaper between 2001 and 2013 were based on information gained through unlawful methods.
He brought the claim alongside six other high-profile figures, including Sir Elton John, his husband David Furnish and campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence.
They accused the newspaper of phone hacking, landline tapping and using private investigators to ‘blag’ information such as medical records.
Following the judgment, the Duke hit out at the “complete and obvious whitewash”.
Read MoreWill Prince Harry finally learn that he can’t have it both ways?
Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars
Harry hails Invictus Games’ belief in ‘unconquered human spirit’
Key Points
- Prince Harry 'tried to reach settlement' with publisher ahead of trial
- Prince Harry and Baroness Doreen Lawrence hit out at 'whitewash' after High Court defeat
- Sir Simon Hughes says ruling is 'very disappointing'
- Judge says that suspicion is not enough to prove unlawful information gathering
- What is Prince Harry’s itinerary for his visit to the UK?
- Will Prince Harry finally learn that he can’t have it both ways?
Comment: After Harry’s Buckingham Palace bust-up, I fear the King will never see his grandchildren again
15:00 , Nicole Wootton-CaneHopes of a reconciliation between Prince Harry and other royals have been dashed by a row over his accommodation and security demands during what was supposed to have been a five-day family visit – and it’s an ailing King Charles who is caught in the middle, says Paul Clements.
Why I fear the King won’t see his grandchildren again
Prince Harry 'tried to reach settlement' with publisher ahead of trial
14:01 , Nicole Wootton-CanePrince Harry and other claimants reportedly tried to reach a settlement with the Daily Mail publisher just a few weeks before the start of their high-stakes legal battle.
According to reports in The Times, the group used an intermediary to approach Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) ahead of the Duke giving evidence.
The report says ANL rejected the offer outright.
What is Prince Harry’s itinerary for his visit to the UK?
14:00 , Nicole Wootton-CanePrince Harry is in London today as his five-day trip to the UK continues.
The Duke is in the country to participate in various events and celebrations leading up to the 2027 Games.
His itinerary includes a visit to Birmingham’s National Exhibition Centre (NEC), which will serve as the primary venue. He is expected to observe and take part in exhibition events alongside competitors from previous Invictus Games.
On Wednesday, he is believed to be in London for a summit of team leaders for the Games.
Comment: Will Prince Harry finally learn that he can’t have it both ways?
13:00 , Nicole Wootton-CaneAs the duke’s multimillion-pound lawsuit against the Daily Mail lands him with a mountainous costs bill, there is one victor – and it is not Prince Harry, says Chris Blackhurst.
Will Prince Harry finally learn that he can’t have it both ways?
Harry’s court battle with Daily Mail publisher in numbers
12:00 , Nicole Wootton-CanePrince Harry and six other household names have lost their high-profile case against the publisher of the Daily Mail.
During a 11-week trial, the group, which included Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence,” alleged unlawful information gathering by Asscoiated Newspaper Limited (ANL), from landline tapping to obtaining information through deception, which, they said, had left them feeling “violation”, “profound betrayal” and “shock and horror”.
But on Tuesday, their claims, strongly denied by ANL, were dismissed in a High Court ruling.
In a 436-page written judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin said he accepted the limited evidence given by the Duke of Sussex at trial in January. However, he ruled that neither Harry nor the other claimants had proven the allegations of unlawful information gathering.
Here, The Independent takes a look at the case in numbers:
Up to £38m legal costs, 4 years and 14 news articles: Harry’s court battle in numbers
What did Prince Harry say following his High Court loss?
11:00 , Nicole Wootton-CaneThe Duke of Sussex and Baroness Doreen Lawrence said in a statement following the dismissal of their claims against Associated Newspapers: “We came to court seeking justice and accountability. But we have received neither.
“This judgment represents a complete reversal of the position which previous judges have taken in relation to the hacking claims successfully brought against both News Group Newspapers and Mirror Group Newspapers, who were represented by, at the time, the judge who made this decision.
“Generic findings about various private investigators that were held by the courts in these parallel claims to have carried out unlawful activity at the very same time in relation to similar stories and well-known individuals have been wholly ignored.
“The fact that this court has chosen to dismiss them represents an inconsistency which is hard to understand or reconcile with common sense, or the evidence heard in the courtroom itself.
“It is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected. However, the lengths to which the court has gone to exonerate the Mail is as shocking as it is totally unwarranted.
“When the court says there is not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing, despite the documents showing otherwise, then one does wonder how justice was ever going to be achieved.
“One need not look past when a private investigator the Mail used actually admitted on tape to having unlawfully blagged Baroness Lawrence, or when a journalist recorded the name of the private investigators she used to find out about highly sensitive medical information, that even the Mail was too worried to publish, or when another private investigator emailed one of the journalists with the actual British Airways seat number and ticketing details for a young girl simply visiting her boyfriend, in return for payment.
“It feels here like one rule for the newspapers and another for the claimants.
“While the claimants presented evidence, Mail journalists simply gave denials and the court chose uncritically to believe them, even in the face of inconsistencies, contradictions and blatant untruths that were obvious to neutral observers in court when compared to the documents.
“We presented to the court evidence which we believed was compelling at the time and remains so now.
“We would like to thank our legal team for all their hard work and all the witnesses who were brave enough to come forward in the pursuit of justice.”
Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars
10:00 , Nicole Wootton-CaneThe Duke of Sussex and six other prominent public figures have lost a major court case accusing the publisher of the Daily Mail of unlawful information gathering.
The claimants, which included Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, had alleged Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) carried out or commissioned unlawful activities such as landline tapping, hiring private investigators to place listening devices inside cars or “blagging” private records.
ANL strongly denied the claims in a high-profile 45-day High Court trial, where Harry and the other celebrity claimants gave evidence.
In a 436-page judgment on Tuesday, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all claims brought against ANL, which related to 57 stories – most of which were published between 1997 and 2015.
The judge said that none of the group had proven their allegations of unlawful information gathering. The burden of proof is lower in the civil courts and claims must be proven on the balance of probability to be successful.
You can read all of the failed claims and what the judge said about them below:
Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars
Watch: Prince Harry will not stay at Buckingham Palace for UK visit after he says invite ‘was withdrawn’
09:30 , Nicole Wootton-CaneIn pictures: Prince Harry attends Invictus Games conference
09:00 , Nicole Wootton-Cane
Recap: Prince Harry loses High Court battle with Daily Mail publisher after failing to prove phone hacking claims
08:30 , Nicole Wootton-CanePrince Harry and six other household names have lost their legal battle against the Daily Mail publisher, after accusing the newspaper of illegally intercepting their voicemails.
A judge ruled that the group had “failed to prove their pleaded allegations of unlawful information gathering” at Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).
During the 11-week trial at the High Court earlier this year, a tearful Duke of Sussex said that ANL had “made my wife’s life an absolute misery” and recounted intrusions into the private life of his former girlfriend Chelsy Davy by members of the newspaper group.
He was joined by Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish, actors Sadie Frost and Liz Hurley, Baroness Doreen Lawrence and politician Sir Simon Hughes in accusing the publisher of landline tapping and obtaining information by deception, also known as “blagging”, carried out by private investigators, freelance journalists and ANL staff.
ANL strongly denied the claims and defended the case, saying it had “established a complete defence to all parts of the claims on the merits” and that the cases were brought too late.
Prince Harry loses High Court battle with Daily Mail publisher
Harry hails Invictus Games’ belief in ‘unconquered human spirit’ after High Court loss
08:00 , Nicole Wootton-CaneThe Duke of Sussex hailed his Invictus Games’ belief in the “unconquered human spirit” in a speech on Tuesday just moments after a High Court judge dismissed his claim against the Daily Mail’s publishers over alleged unlawful information gathering.
Despite the loss, Harry spoke appeared relaxed and even joked about the heatwave, telling Invictus Games conference delegates that the room they were in was one of the “few” in the UK with air conditioning, “so I can understand why every seat is full”.
Harry had arrived at Chatham House in London about an hour before the highly anticipated judgment was released, and appeared businesslike, briefly turning as he entered the building to wave at rows of cameramen and photographers.
The event brought together members of the Invictus community to discuss issues affecting wounded, injured and sick service personnel and veterans.
The Duke’s lawyer David Sherborne was seen entering Chatham House to apparently meet his client and Harry missed around 10 minutes of the conference’s second panel discussion.
There will be intense media scrutiny of the former working royal during his long-planned trip to the UK this week, with mounting speculation about whether he will see his father the King or briefly bring his family to the UK.
What did Prince Harry say after the ruling?
07:00 , Holly EvansIn a joint statement after the ruling, Harry and Lady Lawrence said the ruling was a “complete reversal of the position which previous judges have taken in relation to the hacking claims” brought against News Group Newspapers, publisher of The Sun and the defunct News of the World, and Mirror Group Newspapers, publisher of the Mirror.
They said: “We came to court seeking justice and accountability. But we have received neither.
“Generic findings about various private investigators that were held by the courts in these parallel claims to have carried out unlawful activity at the very same time in relation to similar stories and well-known individuals have been wholly ignored.
“The fact that this court has chosen to dismiss them represents an inconsistency which is hard to understand or reconcile with common sense, or the evidence heard in the court room itself.
“It is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected.
“However, the lengths to which the court has gone to exonerate the Mail is as shocking as it is totally unwarranted.
“When the court says there is not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing, despite the documents showing otherwise, then one does wonder how justice was ever going to be achieved.”
Harry and Lady Lawrence added that “it feels here like one rule for the newspapers and another for the claimants”.
Judge says that suspicion is not enough to prove unlawful information gathering
06:00 , Holly EvansMr Justice Nicklin said throughout his ruling that suspicion of unlawful information gathering alone was not enough to prove it had taken place.
Discussing one of 14 articles that made up the duke’s claim, which concerned his relationship with Laura Gerard-Leigh, the judge said that he was “not persuaded that the evidential picture goes beyond suspicion” that it had been sourced through unlawful means.
He said: “The fact that the published article contained additional detail beyond the identifying information does not justify the inference that those details must have been obtained unlawfully.”
Related to another concerning the duke’s relationship with Chelsy Davy, the judge said: “I accept that he found the article intrusive and was genuinely concerned by how journalists appeared to know private information concerning his relationships.
“But suspicion, even understandable suspicion, is not proof.”
What is Prince Harry’s itinerary for his visit to the UK?
05:00 , Holly EvansPrince Harry is due to visit the UK to mark the one-year countdown until the Invictus Games are hosted in Birmingham next July. The international multi-sport event supports wounded, injured, and sick military service personnel.
The Duke is scheduled to participate in various events and celebrations leading up to the 2027 Games. His itinerary includes a visit to Birmingham’s National Exhibition Centre (NEC), which will serve as the primary venue. He is expected to observe and take part in exhibition events alongside competitors from previous Invictus Games.
While Meghan was initially anticipated to accompany Harry on these engagements, it remains unclear whether she will now travel to the UK.
Harry’s schedule also features commitments with charities Scotty’s Little Soldiers, where he is an ambassador, and WellChild, of which he is a patron.
Additionally, he had planned to take his children to visit the grave of their grandmother, Princess Diana, at Althorp House in Northamptonshire for the first time, though it is uncertain if this visit will still proceed after his invite to stay at Buckingham Palace was withdrawn “at last moment.”
The 14 Daily Mail articles that Harry has taken the newspaper to court over
04:00 , Holly EvansThe Duke of Sussex alleges that 14 articles published by Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) were based on unlawfully obtained information.
Lawyers representing Prince Harry state that these stories, which appeared between 2001 and 2013, "focus primarily and in a highly intrusive and damaging way, on the relationships which he formed, or rather tried to form, during those years prior to meeting his now wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex".
ANL has strongly denied any wrongdoing and is vigorously defending the claim. This legal action is part of a wider case involving other prominent figures, including Sir Elton John, his husband David Furnish, and campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence.
Read the full article here:
The 14 Daily Mail articles that Harry has taken the newspaper to court over
Judge praises claimants for delivering evidence in 'considered manner'
03:00 , Holly EvansIn his judgement, Mr Justice Nicklin praised the claimants and said that in his evidence, Harry “wished the court to understand the personal impact of the matters in issue”.
The judge continued in his ruling that actress Liz Hurley gave her evidence in a “clear and direct manner”.
He continued that actress Sadie Frost gave evidence in a “straightforward manner”, and former MP Sir Simon Hughes in a “careful and considered manner”.
The judge added that Lady Lawrence gave evidence in a “measured and straightforward” way.
He also said that David Furnish – Sir Elton’s husband – was an “impressive witness” who answered questions in a “straightforward and thoughtful way”, and that Sir Elton “gave his evidence in a straightforward and considered manner”.
'I fear the King will never see his grandchildren again'
02:00 , Holly EvansFor a royal couple best known for maintaining an iron grip on their sunny public profile, do I detect a little disquiet in Sussexland?
Prince Harry is making his way from America’s west coast to the UK for a five-day visit on his own. He had initially wanted his wife, Meghan, and their two children, Archie and Lilibet, to accompany him on what is first and foremost a promotional trip for next year’s Invictus Games – but also so they could be reunited with their grandfather, whom they last saw four years ago, before King Charles underwent gruelling treatment for cancer.
For reasons that are not yet fully clear, but which seem to involve an impasse about the British taxpayer providing police protection for the Californians, the Duke has decided at the eleventh hour to travel alone. The full family reunion will simply have to wait – if it ever happens at all. I now fear that the King will never see his grandchildren again.
Read the full analysis from Paul Clements here:
Why I fear the King won’t see his grandchildren again
Will Prince Harry finally learn that he can’t have it both ways?
01:00 , Holly EvansThere never was a killer fact. In the course of the 11-week trial and in his judgment today, Mr Justice Nicklin makes it clear neither Prince Harry nor the six other claimants against Associated Newspapers landed the decisive blow.
That was how it seemed as the marathon hearing unfolded; that’s what the judge concludes. It was up to them to prove their allegations, and they didn’t. Not once. There was plenty of anger, lots of emotion, but when it came down to the wire, to establishing actual verifiable detail, they fell short.
So much so that reading the 436-page document, and the rejection of every single one of the 97 accusations that stories about them were published in the Daily Mail based on unlawfully gathered information, doubts must be raised about the wisdom of bringing the action and seeing it through to its bitter end.
Read the full analysis here:
Will Prince Harry finally learn that he can’t have it both ways?
ICYMI: Sir Simon Hughes says ruling is 'very disappointing'
Wednesday 8 July 2026 00:00 , Joe MiddletonSir Simon Hughes, who lost his claim against Associated Newspapers (ANL) over claims of unlawful information gathering, said in a statement following Tuesday’s ruling: “The judgment in the case against ANL is naturally very disappointing for me, and I am sure for all other claimants.
“I shall take time to consider the lengthy judgment in detail and plan to make no further comment in the near future.”
Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars
Tuesday 7 July 2026 23:00 , Joe MiddletonThe Duke of Sussex and six other prominent public figures have lost a major court case accusing the publisher of the Daily Mail of unlawful information gathering.
In a 436-page judgment on Tuesday, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all claims brought against ANL, which related to 57 stories – most of which were published between 1997 and 2015.
The judge said that none of the group had proven their allegations of unlawful information gathering. The burden of proof is lower in the civil courts and claims must be proven on the balance of probability to be successful.
Read the full article here:
Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars
ICYMI: Dacre says claims were 'conspiracy to destroy a paper'
Tuesday 7 July 2026 22:00 , Joe MiddletonPaul Dacre has labelled the claims brought by Prince Harry and others a “conspiracy to destroy a paper”.
In a statement issued after the judgment was handed down, Mr Dacre said: “Today’s verdict is not just a victory for Associated’s magnificent journalists – several of whom have had a terrible toll imposed on their health and lives – but a free press generally.
“Make no mistake. This was a conspiracy, supported by Hacked Off, to destroy a paper.
“Financed by the orgy-loving, racist Max Mosley and involving the actor Hugh Grant, it was also a sinister bid to resuscitate Leveson Two and impose statutory regulation on the press which, even now, is rearing its ugly head in Labour’s Media Green Paper.
“Some of the allegations made by Harry’s lawyers against the Mail involved Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein.
“They were rejected by the Court. But remember it was the power of the Mail’s journalism that, not once, but twice, resulted in Mandelson being sacked as a minister.
“And it was the Mail on Sunday’s exclusive picture of Prince Andrew, with his arm around 17-year-old Virginia Giuffre in Ghislaine Maxwell’s home, that, ultimately, resulted in justice for Epstein’s underage victims.
“Such justice only happened, as with Stephen Lawrence, because of the actions of a free press.”
What happens next for Prince Harry and other claimants?
Tuesday 7 July 2026 21:30 , Joe MiddletonPrince Harry and six other claimants have lost their case against Associated Newspapers (AN) this afternoon.
AN have said the victory is a “magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism”.
The group has also indicated it will seek to recoup legal costs, which it said total more than £50 million, from the claimants.
Its claim for these costs is likely to be heard at the next hearing, which is expected to last two days from July 29.
Harry hails Invictus Games’ belief in ‘unconquered human spirit’
Tuesday 7 July 2026 20:00 , Holly EvansThe Duke of Sussex hailed his Invictus Games’ belief in the “unconquered human spirit”, just moments after a High Court judge dismissed his claim against the Daily Mail’s publishers over alleged unlawful information gathering.
Despite the loss, Harry appeared relaxed and even joked about the heatwave, telling Invictus Games conference delegates that the room they were in was one of the “few” in the UK with air conditioning, “so I can understand why every seat is full”.
Harry had arrived at Chatham House in London about an hour before the highly anticipated judgment was released, and appeared businesslike, briefly turning as he entered the building to wave at rows of cameramen and photographers.
After a private 45-minute meeting with a number of UK and foreign ministers for veterans, he took to the stage and told delegates: “Every one of us believes that those who have served their country, and in particular those whose lives have been changed by that service, deserve more than our gratitude.
“They deserve opportunity. The chance to redefine one’s purpose and identity. They deserve to truly feel our admiration and respect. And they deserve every chance to build the life they choose beyond military service.
“That’s what the Invictus community is all about.”
Why did Prince Harry sue the Daily Mail publisher?
Tuesday 7 July 2026 19:00 , Holly EvansPrince Harry, alongside other prominent public figures including Sir Elton John, his husband David Furnish, and campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence, alleged that Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) engaged in or commissioned unlawful activities.
These allegedly included hiring private investigators to install listening devices in cars, "blagging" private records, and accessing private phone conversations.
These claims however have been dismissed by a High Court judge.
We take a look at the full timeline leading up to this judgement:
Why did Prince Harry sue the Daily Mail publisher? The duke’s legal battle in full
What were the claims put forward by Elizabeth Hurley?
Tuesday 7 July 2026 18:30 , Holly EvansElizabeth Hurley's claim related to 15 articles published between 2002 and 2011, through which she alleged ANL "wilfully exploited my stolen information using its arsenal of illegal means". Five of them were about her son Damian Hurley and his late father, film producer Steve Bing.
She claimed that private investigators working for the Daily Mail bugged her landline and placed microphones on her home windows to get stories in what she described as a "brutal invasion of privacy".
The mother-of-one, best known for starring in the Austin Powers and Bedazzled films, cried several times as she gave evidence in the case.
Mr Justice Nicklin said he accepted her evidence, which she gave in a “clear and direct manner”, but added: “As with each of the claimants, she has limited evidence to give on the contentious matters in dispute.”
Prince Harry and Baroness Doreen Lawrence hit out at 'whitewash' after High Court defeat
Tuesday 7 July 2026 18:14 , Joe MiddletonThe Duke of Sussex and Baroness Doreen Lawrence have said “it is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected” after the High Court dismissed their claims against Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
The statement added: “This judgment represents a complete reversal of the position which previous judges have taken in relation to the hacking claims successfully brought against both News Group Newspapers and Mirror Group Newspapers, who were represented by, at the time, the judge who made this decision.
“Generic findings about various private investigators that were held by the courts in these parallel claims to have carried out unlawful activity at the very same time in relation to similar stories and well-known individuals have been wholly ignored.
“The fact that this court has chosen to dismiss them represents an inconsistency which is hard to understand or reconcile with common sense, or the evidence heard in the courtroom itself.
“It is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected. However, the lengths to which the court has gone to exonerate the Mail is as shocking as it is totally unwarranted.
“When the court says there is not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing, despite the documents showing otherwise, then one does wonder how justice was ever going to be achieved.
“One need not look past when a private investigator the Mail used actually admitted on tape to having unlawfully blagged Baroness Lawrence, or when a journalist recorded the name of the private investigators she used to find out about highly sensitive medical information, that even the Mail was too worried to publish, or when another private investigator emailed one of the journalists with the actual British Airways seat number and ticketing details for a young girl simply visiting her boyfriend, in return for payment.
“It feels here like one rule for the newspapers and another for the claimants.
“While the claimants presented evidence, Mail journalists simply gave denials and the court chose uncritically to believe them, even in the face of inconsistencies, contradictions and blatant untruths that were obvious to neutral observers in court when compared to the documents.
“We presented to the court evidence which we believed was compelling at the time and remains so now.
“We would like to thank our legal team for all their hard work and all the witnesses who were brave enough to come forward in the pursuit of justice.”
Royal watchers chant 'Harry, Harry' as Duke of Sussex leaves Invictus Games event
Tuesday 7 July 2026 17:22 , Joe MiddletonThe Duke of Sussex has left Chatham House in London after his Invictus Games event.
Harry lost his High Court case against Associated Newspapers Limited over alleged unlawful information gathering on Tuesday afternoon.
The King’s youngest son departed through the front door of the international affairs think tank in central London at around 5.13pm.
He smiled and gave a thumbs up amid shouts of “Harry, Harry” as he stepped into his car.
Sir Simon Hughes says ruling is 'very disappointing'
Tuesday 7 July 2026 16:44 , Holly EvansSir Simon Hughes, who lost his claim against Associated Newspapers (ANL) over claims of unlawful information gathering, said in a statement following Tuesday’s ruling: “The judgment in the case against ANL is naturally very disappointing for me, and I am sure for all other claimants.
“I shall take time to consider the lengthy judgment in detail and plan to make no further comment in the near future.”
