Harry Strikes Out
The decision of the High Court to rule against Prince Harry in his case against the Daily Mail feels like the end of an era.
His mother, Princess Diana, died because of the insatiable and rabid tabloid press. This was a time when journalists would go to any length in order to obtain a story.
We should be wary of giving print media too much credit, but things are no longer anywhere near as bad. In an online age where information is diffused across various platforms, the print media no longer holds as much sway in the public conscience, and publications like The Sun are actually loss-making enterprises nowadays.
All of this is not to underplay the role that newspapers have played in demonising Harry and, in particular, his wife, Meghan Markle. It is true that the Leveson Inquiry failed to get a proper grip on some of the less salubrious machinations of reporters and there is still a sense that tabloids will do anything to get a juicy piece of celebrity gossip.
So why did the case fall apart?
The answer appears to come from an ill-advised attempt to work with the enemy.
The campaign group Hacked Off and its former executive director, Evan Harris, offered the self-described “professional liar”, Graham Johnson, an opportunity to switch sides not long after the investigator was handed a two-month suspended sentence for phone hacking.
This began a decade-long effort to get the truth from a range of other investigators, journalists and shady characters. They were not short of stories to examine as a whole host of celebrities from Elton John to Liz Hurley had suffered invasions into their private lives. In turn, this meant that the investigations were never short of wealthy backers.
The problem was that, despite their best efforts, Hacked Off struggled to establish a pattern of illegal behviour. They thought this had changed when managing to secure the testimony of Gavin Burrows, a former private investigator who now said he was willing to confess to a range of crimes targeting a swathe of celebrities and even Lady Lawrence, the mother of murdered teenager, Stephen Lawrence.
However, before the claim was even launched, disputes over money meant that key witnesses were lost and Burrows ultimately switched sides again, telling lawyers for the Mail that his confession was forged and based on conversations he had had while drunk.
Despite these botched efforts, the claimants not only decided to bring their claim but also pursue it to the very end, culminating in last week’s quite embarrassing judgment where the judge cast doubt on the evidence presented. This leaves Harry and others facing a potentially huge legal bill.
Being unable to prove the alleged unlawful conduct leaves Hacked Off and the campaign for press accountability in a weak and vulnerable position. The political will to push for greater regulation of the tabloids is now heading in a similar direction.
This week’s episode of the podcast explores the issue of issue estoppel in civil litigation. Stick around to hear me try and pronounce Skatteforvaltningen.
Episode link: https://uklawweekly.com/2026-uksc-19/
Make a difference today,
Marcus