U.K. judge dismisses Prince Harry's privacy invasion lawsuit against publisher of Daily Mail

Prince Harry's final legal battle against British tabloids concluded in defeat Tuesday, as a judge dismissed his privacy invasion claims against the publisher of the Daily Mail. Justice Matthew Nicklin found that the Duke of Sussex failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Associated Newspapers Ltd. engaged in unlawful activities.

"In substance, the claimants' case invites the Court to conclude that, because the information was private and because Associated cannot positively explain how it was sourced, the article must have been unlawfully sourced," Nicklin wrote. "That is not a permissible approach."

“

In substance, the claimants' case invites the Court to conclude that, because the information was private and because Associated cannot positively explain how it was sourced, the article must have been unlawfully sourced. That is not a permissible approach.

The ruling potentially leaves Harry and six other claimants, including Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley, facing substantial legal bills, estimated to exceed 50 million pounds ($67 million) for both sides. Associated Newspapers Ltd. hailed the decision as an "overwhelming victory" and a "magnificent vindication" of its journalism, while newspapers denied the allegations as "preposterous," asserting that the articles were based on lawful sources.

Harry expressed his disappointment, calling the outcome a "complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected." He stated that the court's efforts to exonerate the Mail were "shocking as it is totally unwarranted." This marks a mixed legacy for Harry's legal campaigns against tabloid publishers, following a previous victory against publishers of the Daily Mirror for phone hacking and a settlement with Rupert Murdoch's The Sun.

“

It is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected.