DistantNews
Support us
Prince Harry, Elton John lose privacy lawsuit against Daily Mail publisher
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Finland /Culture & Society

Prince Harry, Elton John lose privacy lawsuit against Daily Mail publisher

From Helsingin Sanomat · () Finnish

Translated from Finnish, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Outcome reported
  • Prince Harry and musician Elton John have lost a privacy lawsuit against Associated Newspapers in the UK.
  • The group sued the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday for alleged phone hacking and unlawful information gathering.
  • The court ruled that while private information was published, it could not be proven that it was obtained unlawfully.

Prince Harry, musician Elton John, and five other high-profile individuals have lost a significant privacy lawsuit against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday in Britain. The group had accused Associated Newspapers of alleged phone hacking, obtaining private health information through deception, and other unlawful methods of information gathering.

Harry's older woman

โ€” Mail on SundayThis was the subject of an article Harry claimed was based on unlawfully obtained information about calls between him and TV presenter Natalie Pinkham.

Prince Harry's claim cited 14 articles published between 2001 and 2013, which he alleged contained unlawfully obtained information. In total, the claimants identified over 50 articles. For instance, Harry claimed an article from 2002 published by Mail on Sunday was based on illegally acquired information about calls between him and TV presenter Natalie Pinkham, concerning an article about "Harry's older woman."

The journalist who wrote the article defended himself by stating that the flirtation between Harry and Pinkham was "common knowledge" and that he had multiple contacts within the inner circles of both individuals, a defense the court found credible. While the newspapers had published private details and could not always explain how they obtained them, the court concluded that it could not be proven that the information was acquired unlawfully.

common knowledge

โ€” JournalistThe journalist who wrote the article defended his reporting by stating that the flirtation between Harry and Pinkham was common knowledge.

The judge stated that the claimants had often relied on inference, and that reasonable suspicion was not sufficient in the eyes of the court. The costs of the litigation will be reviewed separately at the end of July, and the possibility of appeal or further recourse will be clarified later.

reasonable suspicion is not sufficient in the eyes of the court

โ€” JudgeThe judge stated that the claimants had often relied on inference, and that reasonable suspicion was not sufficient in the eyes of the court.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by Helsingin Sanomat in Finnish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.