Related Articles
Prince Harry has claimed his teenage years were ‘largely deprived’ due to the publisher of the Daily Mail newspaper, calling the ‘unlawful actions’ of Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) a ‘major betrayal’ of promises made to improve media conduct following the untimely death of his mother.
Making a surprise appearance at the Royal Courts of Justice on Monday (March 27), the Duke of Sussex was among several high profile individuals testifying against the media outlet, including Sir Elton John, his husband David Furnish, Baroness Doreen Lawrence of Clarendon and Sadie Frost
The group of individuals, which also includes Liz Hurley and former Lib Dem MP Sir Simon Hughes, are bringing privacy claims against the publisher over allegations it carried out or commissioned illegal or unlawful information-gathering.
READ MORE: Royal Family: Full list of celebrities who have turned down the invitation to perform at King Charles’s coronation from Elton John to Ed Sheeran
(Image: PA Wire/PA Images)
In a document filed on Harry’s behalf, barrister David Sherborne said the duke is “troubled that, through Associated’s unlawful acts, he was largely deprived of important aspects of his teenage years”.
The barrister continued: “In particular, suspicion and paranoia was caused by Associated’s publication of the unlawful articles: friends were lost or cut off as a result and everyone became a ‘suspect’ since he was misled by the way that the articles were written into believing that those close to him were the source of this information being provided to Associated’s newspapers.”
He added: “The claimant regards Associated’s unlawful acts to amount to a major betrayal given promises made by the media to improve its conduct following the tragic and untimely death of his mother, Princess Diana, in 1997.”
ANL, which publishes the Mail On Sunday and MailOnline, has ‘firmly denied’ the allegations that have been made against it. Representing ANL, Adrian Beltrami KC, in written submissions, argued the legal actions have been brought too late and that the claims were “largely inferential”.
The barrister said the individuals have to prove they did not know earlier, or could not have discovered earlier, they might have had a claim against ANL for alleged misuse of their private information.
(Image: PA)
He said: “Those claims, which relate to matters said to have taken place as early as 1993, and for the most part in the first decade of this century, are undeniably prima facie time-barred.”
He later said none of the group said they believe they continued to be targeted by unlawful information gathering after 2015, adding: “In fact, in most instances their own case is that such targeting ended substantially before then.”
Following Monday’s hearing, an ANL spokesman said private investigator Gavin Burrows allegedly confessing “to carrying out a wide range of criminal activities on behalf of Mail newspapers” had prompted the claims but “according to written submissions by Adrian Beltrami KC, counsel for Associated, Mr Burrows ‘has provided a signed witness statement denying that he was commissioned or instructed by Associated to carry out any unlawful activity’.”
Monday was the first day of the four-day hearing in London. The hearing continued before Mr Justice Nicklin in London on Tuesday.
Got a story you think we should be covering? Email ertan.karpazli@reachplc.com.
Click here to sign up to our daily newsletter for the latest news and top stories from MyLondon sent straight to your inbox.
READ NEXT:
