Murdoch’s journalists unlawfully targeted Meghan and Diana, court told
Journalists at Murdoch-owned newspapers “unlawfully targeted” the Duchess of Sussex more than two decades after accessing the private pager messages of Diana, Princess of Wales, the legal team for Prince Harry has told the high court in London.
In the latest development in Harry’s war against the tabloid press, his lawyers argued he had experienced a lifetime of “overwhelming intrusion” from Murdoch-owned newspapers – with one example cited relating to an article written when he was nine.
The accusations came a day after Harry’s lawyer’s directly implicated Rupert Murdoch in the legal battle, claiming the 93-year-old billionaire oversaw a “culture of impunity” at News Group Newspapers (NGN), the publisher of the Sun and the now defunct News of the World.
In written submissions to the high court on Thursday, Harry’s lawyers alleged that the publisher had demonstrated a “willingness to engage systemically in unlawful and unethical behaviour … on an industrial scale” when it came to the duke. This included the “interception of landline calls, the interception of calls from cordless phones and analogue mobile calls, and the interception of landline voicemails”, they said.
The activity was said to be “known about, encouraged and concealed by those in positions of responsibility” at
NGN, including the former News of the World editor Piers Morgan.
Mr Justice Fancourt ruled in July that Harry and more than 40 others – including the actor Hugh Grant and the Labour peer Doreen Lawrence – could not bring a claim relating to phone hacking against the publisher because it was filed too late. But he ruled that other allegations, such as about use of private investigators and invasion of privacy should go to trial, due to take place in January 2025.
In a three-day hearing at the high court, lawyers for Harry and others sought to change details of their case against NGN to include allegations that senior executives were aware of wrongdoing. In Harry’s case, lawyers are seeking to extend the period the court is set to examine to take in from 1994 to 2016, having previously included information from 1996 to 2011.
Anthony Hudson KC, NGN’s lawyer, said on Wednesday that the changes appeared “to be designed to grab headlines, and not to progress the individual claims”.
On Thursday, Hudson said Harry and his lawyers had “disregarded” the decision to narrow the scope of the trial and had instead “doubled down” and expanded it. In written arguments NGN’s team said the amendments should not be allowed as the claims were made too late, lacked evidence and related to phone-hacking claims that had already been dismissed.
The new allegations include that Harry’s late mother, Diana, “was under close surveillance and her calls were being unlawfully intercepted by NGN, which was known about by its editors and senior executives”. Lawyers pointed to a News of the World article which they said showed the papers knew she had a “secret” pager, and the messages contained within it.
Harry’s lawyers argue the intrusion into his privacy continued, and allege that in 2016 journalists at the Sun tasked private investigators to target Meghan, then his girlfriend.
David Sherborne, who also represented Harry in his legal victory against Mirror Group Newspapers over allegations of phone hacking and unlawful activities – told the court that a private investigator had “in the full knowledge” of NGN unlawfully obtained the duchess’s mobile number and social security number “in order to obtain new information about their relationship, for the purpose of publication in the Sun”.
A spokesperson for NGN said on Wednesday that the amendments sought by the claimants were “a scurrilous and cynical attack” and had “nothing to do with seeking compensation for victims of phone hacking or unlawful information-gathering”. They said lawyers for the claimants worked with “former phone hackers” and “antipress campaigners” who were using civil procedures to make protected allegations.
The hearing is due to conclude on Friday. Fancourt is expected to rule on whether the updated claims can be included at a later date.