Prince Harry faces multi‑million‑pound bill after Daily Mail case ends in defeat

The High Court is set to announce the final cost order on Friday for Prince Harry and six other public figures who lost a high‑profile phone‑hacking lawsuit against the Daily Mail’s publisher, Associated Newspapers.

Court dismisses privacy claims

After an 11‑week trial, a judge ruled that the claimants, including Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish, actresses Liz Hurley and Sadie Frost, campaigner Doreen Lawrence and former MP Simon Hughes, had not proved the alleged illegal information gathering. The decision, handed down in July, was hailed by Associated Newspapers’ editor‑in‑chief Paul Dacre as “an overwhelming vindication of our journalism”.

During the trial, the High Court capped each side’s legal budget at roughly £4 million to curb spiralling expenses. Nonetheless, the publisher’s total outlay is estimated at more than £34 million, a figure that will now be assessed against the claimants’ insurance cover of £16.2 million.

Cost battle looms

Legal experts warn the dispute over who pays the remainder will be fiercely contested.

“Given the stakes, the battle over costs will be just as hard fought as the main claim was, and unless there is a settlement, it will not be a quick process.”

That observation came from David Bailey‑Vella, chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers, who noted the earlier “Wagatha Christie” libel case took nearly three years to resolve. Colin Campbell, a costs law consultant and former costs judge, said the shortfall between the insurer’s payout and the total bill could fall on the individual claimants, with the newspaper likely to pursue Prince Harry first.

Associated Newspapers has applied for an indemnity‑based cost order, which would increase the amount the claimants must repay if the court finds their conduct “unreasonable to a high degree”. While critics have accused some claimants of “white‑wash” tactics, the judge is expected to focus on the evidence presented rather than post‑judgment commentary.

Should the court award indemnity costs, the six celebrities could face bills far exceeding the insurance limit, potentially prompting settlement talks before a formal assessment. The outcome will serve as a cautionary tale for future privacy actions against media organisations.

For more insight into the financial pressures of high‑profile litigation, see our piece on law trainees charging for advice on social media.