Prince Harry and five others appeal loss in Daily Mail privacy case

Applications filed on 6 November

Prince Harry, Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, David Furnish, Sadie Frost and Baroness Doreen Lawrence have asked the Court of Appeal for permission to challenge the rulings in their case against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday. A spokesperson for the group said on Friday, 6 November 2026 that the applications had been filed, and court staff confirmed the filing the same day. The planned appeal targets two decisions: Mr Justice Nicklin's dismissal of the claims and a later indemnity costs order. Sir Simon Hughes, a Liberal Democrat politician who was also part of the action, was not named in the statement, and the BBC has contacted him to ask whether he is joining the appeal.

Why the claims failed

The claimants alleged that Mail journalists and private investigators used unlawful methods, including voicemail interception, landline tapping and obtaining information by deception, which is known as "blagging". The case was heard over an 11-week trial in London. In a judgment dated 7 July, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all the allegations because the claimants had not proved that any information was obtained unlawfully. His 436-page written verdict said a story could not be presumed unlawfully sourced if a legitimate and realistic lawful route to it existed. The BBC reports that Prince Harry testified in person and said that details in 14 articles about him showed phone calls had been listened to, but the judge found he had failed to prove this. Lawyers for the publisher argued that the articles reflected a pattern of legitimate sourcing, including friends, press officers, previous reporting, freelance journalists and other news agencies.

Costs order and payment

In August, a month after the judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled that the case was rare enough for the claimants to pay far more than the costs agreed before the trial. He ordered that ANL's costs be assessed on an indemnity basis, which is more favourable to the publisher in what it can recover, except where orders had already been made. The judge also required the claimants to pay an initial contribution of £9,544,355 within seven days, with the final total to be set at further hearings. The overall exposure is reported differently: the BBC puts the joint bill at up to £34.5m, while the Guardian describes it as more than £50m.

Publisher and claimants' positions

ANL strongly denied the claims. A spokesperson for the publisher described the judgment as an "overwhelming victory for the Daily Mail and its journalists". Lawyers for the publisher described the claims as "lurid" and "preposterous". Paul Dacre, the former Mail editor, said after the verdict that the case was a "conspiracy" organised by press regulation campaigners to "destroy a paper". Prince Harry and Baroness Lawrence called the verdict a "complete and obvious whitewash", and the claimants' joint statement said the decisions were legally and factually flawed.

What comes next

The Court of Appeal must first decide whether to grant the claimants permission to appeal. No hearing date has been reported in the coverage. The initial £9,544,355 payment and the final costs total remain unresolved while the appeal bids are considered.