A judge rejected the privacy case brought by the Duke of Sussex and other high-profile claimants against Associated Newspapers
Prince Harry, Sir Elton John and several other prominent figures could be forced to pay millions toward the legal costs of Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers following the failure of their privacy claims.
In a costs judgment published on Friday, Mr Justice Matthew Nicklin ordered the claimants to make an interim payment of £9.54 million to Associated Newspapers.
The ruling comes amid separate reports that Harry and Meghan Markle are preparing to return to the UK with their children this month.
Nicklin rejected the claimants’ case last month, dismissing allegations that Associated’s newspaper titles had engaged in widespread unlawful information-gathering practices, including phone hacking.
In his latest judgment, the judge ruled that the publisher’s costs should be assessed on an “indemnity basis.” This is more favorable to the receiving party than the standard basis and means proportionality is not applied in the same way when the final costs are calculated.
Nicklin was highly critical of how the case had been presented, saying some serious allegations had remained on “speculative and inferential” foundations.
“In my judgment, the cumulative effect of these matters takes the case well outside the norm,” he said. “The conduct was unreasonable to a high degree.”
The court heard during a July hearing that Associated Newspapers had accumulated legal costs of £34.5 million, equivalent to about $45.8 million. The claimants reportedly held an insurance policy covering only £16 million, leaving them potentially exposed to a substantial personal bill.
Associated’s lawyer, Antony White, argued that the claimants had made broad and serious allegations without sufficient evidence, significantly increasing the publisher’s legal expenses. He also criticized Harry’s public statement following the original ruling.
Lawyer Nicholas Bacon, representing the claimants, described Associated’s £34.5 million bill as “eye-watering” and argued that it far exceeded the previously agreed budget.
A spokesperson for Associated Newspapers called the decision “another overwhelming victory for the Mail and its journalism.” Harry’s representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
