Prince Harry warned phone-hacking case is consuming too much court time
Prince Harry has been warned that his phone-hacking case against the publisher of The Sun is consuming too much court time.
In a preliminary ruling on Friday, Mr Justice Fancourt criticised both legal teams for the Duke of Sussex and News Group Newspapers (NGN), saying disputes between them resembled a campaign between “two obdurate but well-resourced armies”.
The Duke, 40, alleges that he was targeted by journalists and private investigators working for NGN, which also published the now-defunct News of the World.
On Friday, the judge wrote: “I have previously indicated to the parties that this individual claim... although it raises important issues, is starting to absorb more than an appropriate share of the court’s resources, contrary to the requirement in the overriding objective to deal with cases justly and at proportionate cost. It is now doing so.
“The claim at times resembles more an entrenched front in a campaign between two obdurate but well-resourced armies than a claim for misuse of private information.
“It is unsatisfactory to say the least that the court should be faced a second time with having to resolve such a large extent of disputed material on amendments to a statement of case.”
The Duke of Sussex is among a number of people to bring cases against the publisher over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
A full trial of some of the cases is due to be held at the High Court in January next year.
The publisher has previously denied that unlawful activity took place at The Sun.
‘Urgency’ over case
In his 12-page written ruling, the judge said he had “perhaps unduly optimistically, expected that the residual disputed material would be limited” in light of his decisions in May over how the Duke could argue his case.
He added: “But, in the event, I am faced with a table of disputes running to 44 pages, with 49 separate items or groups of items disputed, only a handful of which were eventually agreed, and 34 pages of dense submissions by NGN in support of their objections...”
The judge granted the Duke’s lawyers permission to make certain amendments to how his case was put, while also upholding some of NGN’s objections.
He said: “It is clearly imperative that the content of the pleaded case is resolved as soon as possible.”
The judge said he had made his ruling “as short as reasonably possible” in light of the “urgency” over the case and trial preparations.
He added: “I have also previously indicated that this claim will not be adjourned and will be either tried in January 2025 or settled, since it was issued as far back as September 2019 and has been stood out of eligibility for two previous listed trial dates. That remains the position.”
The judgment rules that the Duke is refused permission to continue allegations “of planting bugs in rooms and residences and bugs or tracking devices on cars” because “no particulars whatsoever of such allegations have been provided”.
The Duke has withdrawn a specific allegation in relation to Chelsy Davy’s car, it said.
Permission to include references to “bugging” has been refused because of “no particulars”, as is a proposal to include the allegation “and/or the use of listening and tracking devices”.
‘Crossed the line’
The judge also dismissed multiple objections from NGN.
In criticising both the Duke and NGN for adding unsolicited extra amendments to their pleas, the judge said it was “not a further opportunity for the Duke to plead discrete new causes of action that had not been pleaded in the original draft, nor was [it] an opportunity for NGN to raise new objections to the content of the previous draft”.
He added: “Regrettably, it appears to me that, to varying extents, both parties have crossed the line in these respects.”
Rebuking NGN for objecting to the Duke’s failure to say “who exactly committed the wrong in question” for some of his claims, the judge said it was “somewhat obtuse and pointless for NGN to complain” when “the facts relating to the Duke’s case have allegedly been concealed by NGN and are not within his knowledge”.
Later in the judgement, he reiterated: “Once again, it is hopeless for NGN to complain that the Duke has not pleaded exactly who did what.
“The Duke does not know that, by reason of the nature of the case.
“He does however have to identify at trial that the invoice related to obtaining or attempting to obtain his private information, or was otherwise an actionable wrong.”
It comes amid the Duke’s trip to southern Africa. On Thursday, he returned to Lesotho for the first time in six years, meeting with the country’s King, Queen and prime minister.
He also visited the Sentebale charity he co-founded in 2006, for what his office described as a “series of impactful events”.
The Duke spent two months in the kingdom of Lesotho during his gap year when he was 19 in 2004 that inspired him to establish the Sentebale charity two years later, which now also works in Botswana.
He is expected to continue his solo trip with a visit to Johannesburg in South Africa.
