Last-minute settlement talks stall Prince Harry’s high-stakes trial against British tabloids

Britain's Prince Harry arrives in the gardens of Buckingham Palace in London, Jan. 16, 2020. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth, File)

LONDON — The sequel to Prince Harry vs. the British tabloids stalled Tuesday amid settlement talks before the start of a high-stakes trial pitting him against Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers.

Harry, 40, the younger son of King Charles III, and one other claimant remain alone among hundreds who have settled lawsuits against News Group Newspapers, the publisher of The Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, over allegations their phones were hacked and investigators unlawfully snooped on their lives.

It would be the first case of its kind to go to trial against the publisher since a widespread phone hacking scandal forced Murdoch to close News of the World in 2011. News Group has settled more than 1,300 other claims.

The trial, which was due to start Tuesday morning, was adjourned until the afternoon as the parties held private out-of-court settlement discussions.

When Judge Timothy Fancourt refused to allow a further delay until Wednesday, attorneys on both sides said they would go to the Court of Appeal to challenge his ruling, effectively stalling the trial start.

News Group attorney Anthony Hudson said there had been productive discussions and said there was a “very substantial sum” on the line if the trial began before they could complete “very intense negotiations.”

For the Duke of Sussex, it will be the second trial in London’s High Court in his long-running feud with the press that he blames for the death of his mother, Princess Diana, who was killed in a car crash in 1997 while being chased by paparazzi in Paris. He also blames them for persistent attacks on his wife, actor Meghan Markle, that led them to leave the royal life and flee to the U.S. in 2020.

Harry has said his mission to hold the media accountable has led to a rift with his family, but it’s one he feels compelled to carry out to expose wrongdoing.

He won a similar case against the publisher of the Daily Mirror newspaper in 2023 and he has another case pending against the Daily Mail’s publisher.

Here’s a look at the case:

Allegations aimed at editors and executives

Harry claims News Group journalists and private investigators they hired violated his privacy by using unlawful tactics to dig up dirt on him and his family between 1996 and 2011.

His fellow claimant, Tom Watson, a former deputy leader of the Labour Party, said his voicemails were intercepted during a period when he was investigating the hacking scandal.

Their lawyer said the newspapers had a widespread practice of using deception to obtain medical, phone and flight records, bugged homes and placed listening devices in cars.

They allege that executives concealed the skullduggery through means that included destroying documents.

“This allegation is wrong, unsustainable, and is strongly denied,” News Group said in a statement.

Former executives accused of playing a role include Will Lewis, now CEO of the Washington Post, and Rebekah Brooks, CEO of News UK, a division of News Corp. They have denied wrongdoing.

Brooks was acquitted of phone hacking conspiracy charges in a criminal trial in 2014, though her former colleague, Andy Coulson, who was later spokesman for Prime Minister David Cameron, was jailed.

News Group strongly denies the allegations and it said Harry failed to bring his lawsuit within the required six-year limit.

News Group apologized to News of the World phone hacking victims in 2011. The Sun has never accepted liability.

Strong incentive to settle

Actor Hugh Grant had been one of Harry’s remaining co-claimants, but said he was forced to accept “an enormous sum of money” to settle because he could have faced a legal bill of 10 million pounds ($12.3 million) even if he won at trial.

Under English civil law, a claimant who wins a court judgment that is lower than what they were offered to settle, has to pay the legal bills for both sides. The law is intended to discourage lengthy trials.

Despite the grave financial risk, Harry told The New York Times Dealbook Summit in December that he was not going to fold.

“They’ve settled because they’ve had to settle,” he said of other claimants. “One of the main reasons for seeing this through is accountability, because I’m the last person that can actually achieve that.”

Litigation, a source of family friction

The trial, expected to last 10 weeks, would put Harry back in the witness box for several days in February.

In 2023, Harry became the first senior member of the royal family to testify in court since the late 19th century, when Queen Victoria’s eldest son, Prince Albert Edward, testified twice.

That has put Harry at odds with a family famous for a “never complain, never explain” attitude.

Harry revealed in court papers that his father opposed his litigation. He also said his older brother William, Prince of Wales and heir to the throne, had received a “huge sum” to settle a complaint against News Group.

Harry said his tabloid war was central to his fallout with his family.

“The mission continues, but it has, yes, it’s caused, as you say, part of a rift,” Harry said in the documentary “Tabloids On Trial.”

Harry said he wished his family had joined him in making a stand against media offenses.

“But, you know, I’m doing this for my reasons,” he said.

Case gets to trial despite setbacks

News Group has failed to kill the case over the past two years, but Harry has experienced some setbacks in a series of sometimes bruising hearings.

The publisher succeeded in getting Harry’s phone hacking claims thrown out because the judge said he should have been aware of the widely publicized scandal and could have brought his lawsuit sooner.

The judge also rejected Harry’s effort to broaden the case to include claims of eavesdropping on his mother, unearthing private information on his wife and implicating Murdoch.

Harry alleged Murdoch, who was chief executive of the company that controlled NGN, was part of the effort to conceal evidence of hacking or had “turned a blind eye” to it. The judge said those allegations would add nothing material to claims that include other “trusted lieutenants,” such as Brooks and Murdoch’s younger son, James Murdoch.

The judge also tossed out Harry’s bid to include assertions that Buckingham Palace had a secret deal with News Group executives that called for a settlement and an apology to be worked out after other phone hacking litigation was resolved.

Judge Timothy Fancourt said Harry failed to produce witnesses or documents that could show his grandmother, the late Queen Elizabeth II, had approved of the deal to protect the royal family from embarrassing litigation.

The publisher denied there was any secret agreement.

By Brian Melley

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS