UK Prince Harry’s Legal Team Ordered to Disclose Witness Payments in Daily Mail Case

[Social Media]

 

Prince Harry’s Legal Team Ordered to Disclose Witness Payments in Daily Mail Case

 

Prince Harry and his fellow celebrity claimants have been dealt a setback in their legal battle against the publisher of the Daily Mail, after a High Court judge ordered their lawyers to disclose details of payments made to witnesses and the circumstances under which they first learned they were alleged victims of unlawful information gathering.

 

The case, which also includes public figures such as Sir Elton John, actresses Sadie Frost and Liz Hurley, revolves around serious allegations of misconduct by Associated Newspapers. The publisher is accused of engaging in or commissioning unlawful activities, including phone tapping, accessing private records through deception — known as “blagging” — and even burglary. Associated Newspapers has fiercely denied the allegations, calling them “lurid” and “simply preposterous.”

 

However, the credibility of the celebrity claimants’ case is now under scrutiny. Mr Justice Nicklin ruled on Friday that the lawyers representing the group must disclose any documents “that can support a case that a witness has been paid or offered other inducement for their evidence, whether directly or indirectly.” The judge stressed that Associated Newspapers could reasonably use such information to question the reliability of the claimants’ witnesses.

 

According to Associated Newspapers, the few documents that have been disclosed so far suggest that “payments were made or offered” to obtain evidence and related invoices. These payments are said to have been made by the legal team’s so-called “research team”, which includes former Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris and journalist Graham Johnson. Johnson was given a suspended prison sentence in 2014 after admitting to phone hacking while working for the Sunday Mirror.

 

The judge took issue with the way the claimants’ legal team has handled disclosures, stating that their position has been “undermined by their inconsistent and incoherent approach to disclosure of documents relating to payments to potential witnesses and/or other inducements.” He added that “there are serious questions to be answered” about the role and status of this research team, and made clear his view that “it appears highly likely that members of the research team do hold documents that fall within the claimants’ standard disclosure obligations, and which have not yet been disclosed.”

 

The claimants must also provide further detail on what the court described as the “watershed” moment — when their lawyers first informed them they had allegedly been victims of unlawful surveillance. This timeline could prove important in determining the strength and consistency of their case.

 

The lawsuit is shaping up to be one of the most expensive and high-profile legal battles in recent memory, with costs projected to reach as much as £38 million. The trial is scheduled to begin in January and is expected to last for approximately nine weeks.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-07-14

 

 

[jippytum]

in the original case Max Mosley paid the legal fees for Hugh Grant and others after he was exposed indulging in kinky

sex.