The high court proceedings shed light on the Duke of Sussex's claims against the publisher of Mirror Group newspapers, alleging phone hacking. Mirror Group, however, argued that Harry was not a victim of phone hacking, asserting that his legal claim was primarily driven by his campaign to reform the British press.
During the trial, the publisher acknowledged one instance of unlawfully obtaining Harry's private information at a nightclub, expressing their apologies. Casey Andrew Green, representing Mirror Group, suggested that £500 would suffice as compensation for this specific incident, claiming it to be an isolated and limited occurrence.
The barrister further contended that the rest of Harry's case should be dismissed, emphasizing that despite his unique public role, he must bear the responsibility of proving his claims.
Some view the compensation of £500 as a meager amount, barely enough to purchase another designer shirt. It appears to be a mere fraction of what Harry sought in his legal action, which encompassed 33 cases for which concrete evidence was not presented during the trial. It's worth noting that this £500 compensation relates to the one instance admitted to by Mirror Group before the trial, rather than the broader claims Harry made. Despite this, there is still a possibility that Harry could lose the case and be liable for the legal costs incurred.
Additionally, Harry's wife's actions may have affected potential merchandising deals that could have aided their financial situation. The trial, which has extended over several weeks, has accrued substantial legal costs for both parties involved. Four representative claimants, including Harry, have given evidence during the seven-week trial. The publisher, MGN, which owns titles like Mirror, Sunday Mirror, and Sunday People, has largely contested the claims, arguing that some were brought too late.
Andrew Green, representing MGN, argued that proving someone to be a victim of widespread media intrusion is distinct from demonstrating unlawful voicemail interception or other illegal information gathering techniques by specific newspaper titles. In light of this, Green proposed a maximum compensation of £500 for Harry, considering the single invoice mentioning his name, which related to inquiries on an isolated occasion, with the invoice amount of £75 indicating limited inquiries.
Throughout the trial, sympathy for the Duke of Sussex has been expressed due to the extraordinary degree of media intrusion he has faced throughout his life. However, it is important to differentiate between being a victim of media intrusion in general and proving specific hacking incidents involving The Mirror's titles, as MGN firmly denies any such hacking claims.
The trial has now reached the stage of closing arguments, leaving the final decision in the hands of the court. The outcome will determine not only the compensation but also the broader implications for press reform and privacy rights.
