Prince Harry, Elton John ordered to pay $13 million after losing privacy case
Translated from Spanish, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- Prince Harry and six other high-profile figures must pay an initial $13 million to a British newspaper publisher after losing a privacy invasion lawsuit.
- The payment is part of a larger potential cost of around $48 million, including future legal fees.
- The claimants alleged phone hacking and other unlawful practices by Associated Newspapers Ltd., the publisher of the Daily Mail.
Prince Harry and six other prominent individuals, including Elton John and Sadie Frost, have been ordered to pay an initial 9.5 million pounds ($13 million) to Associated Newspapers Ltd., the publisher of Britain's Daily Mail, following their unsuccessful invasion of privacy lawsuit. The payment, due by August 28, represents a significant defeat for the claimants and a victory for the newspaper group.
several features were important in his decision, including the "speculative" nature of the claims and the failure of the claimants to "voluntarily" withdraw serious allegations that could no longer be backed up.
The High Court ruling also means the claimants could be liable for an additional 25 million pounds in legal costs, bringing the total potential payout to around 34.5 million pounds ($48 million). This figure covers the publisher's claimed expenses during the legal battle. While the claimants had insurance for roughly half of these costs, the full extent of their liability is still being determined.
The conduct was unreasonable to a high degree.
The group, which also included Doreen Lawrence, David Furnish, Liz Hurley, and Simon Hughes, had accused Associated Newspapers of unlawful practices, including illegal phone hacking. However, Justice Matthew Nicklin found several aspects of their case to be "speculative" and criticized the claimants for failing to voluntarily withdraw serious allegations that could not be substantiated. He described their conduct as "unreasonable to a high degree."
could not have gone much worse for the claimants.
Lawyers for the claimants are expected to argue before costs judges that they relied on the publisher's original budget when purchasing insurance, potentially seeking to limit their final payment. However, the initial ruling marks a substantial financial blow and a public setback for the high-profile figures involved in the litigation.
disappointed and surprised
Originally published by ABC Color in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.