British court rules Prince Harry, Elton John suit against Daily Mail publisher can go to trial
Nov. 10 (UPI) -- A British judge on Friday cleared a privacy suit brought by Prince Harry, Elton John and four other high-profile figures against Associated Newspapers to proceed to trial.
The High Court ruled that the case, which includes John's husband David Furnish, actors Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost, and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, can move forward despite exceeding the six-year statute of limitations for civil suits, according to the United Kingdom's Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
The suit alleges the plaintiffs are "the victims of abhorrent criminal activity and gross breaches of privacy" that involved the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday and MailOnline using private investigators to bug their cars and homes and tap phones, law firm Hamlins, which represents Harry and Frost, said when the case was filed in 2022.
The newspapers are also alleged to have paid police for "inside, sensitive information," used deception to procure medical records from private hospitals, clinics, and treatment centers, and accessed "bank accounts, credit histories and financial transactions through illicit means and manipulation."
Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the three news operations, strongly denies the claims, which it dismisses as risible. It had been arguing to get the case thrown out on the ground the alleged breaches, some of which date back to the 1990s, happened too long ago to be litigated in civil court.
But Justice Matthew Nicklin said Associated Newspapers had "not been able to deliver a 'knockout blow' to the claims" of any of the plaintiffs and he accepted their argument that the six-year rule should not apply because they were unaware of the illicit information gathering activities until long after.
In June, Harry became the first senior member of the royal family to appear in a court in more than 130 years when he testified as a witness in his phone hacking case against Mirror Group Newspapers. He is seeking damages of $540,000.
A ruling on that case is expected in the coming months.
