Skip to main content

Prince Harry loses long legal battle against U.K. tabloid publisher

▶ Watch Video: Why Prince Harry isn’t staying at Buckingham Palace during U.K. visit

London — Britain’s Prince Harry has lost his long-running legal battle against the publisher of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday tabloid newspapers, according to court documents seen by CBS News on Tuesday. All claims were thrown out by the court in what is widely expected to be the last of the prince’s courtroom battles against British media outlets.

Harry, the Duke of Sussex, was among several claimants in the case — along with pop star Elton John and actor Elizabeth Hurley — who accused the publisher of the popular tabloids, Associated Newspapers (ANL), of unlawfully gathering information about them through methods such as phone tapping, intercepting voicemails and impersonating people to obtain personal information.

TOPSHOT-BRITAIN-ROYALS-INVICTUS GAMES
Britain’s Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, arrives at Chatham House in London, England, July 7, 2026.

JUSTIN TALLIS/AFP/Getty

In its ruling on Tuesday, the U.K. High Court dismissed the claims, saying they could not be proven.

Lawyers for Harry and the other claimants said the alleged acts took place between 1993 and 2011, but that the behavior continued into 2018.

ANL had previously denied wrongdoing by its journalists, calling the allegations “preposterous” and saying the 50 or so articles cited in the lawsuit were all based on information gathered lawfully through people close to the claimants. ANL had argued for the case to be thrown out because of the amount of time that had passed since the alleged transgressions.

At the beginning of the lawsuit in January, Harry said press snooping had made him “paranoid beyond belief.” 

Last year, the publisher of The Sun newspaper paid the duke “substantial damages” in an out-of-court settlement and profusely apologized for the methods it had used.

In 2023, Harry won 15 of 33 claims of phone hacking in a lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers. The judge awarded Harry around $180,000 in damages, and the following year the publisher paid him a further $370,000 to settle his other claims against the group.

Tuesday’s ruling came during a rare visit by Harry to the U.K., after intense speculation about whether he would bring his wife Meghan and their two children, Archie and Lilibet, who did not end up traveling with him. The prince engaged in a public back-and-forth with Buckingham Palace over where he stays in his home country and the level of security that would be afforded to him and his family, if they were to join him on British soil.

Harry has long blamed the news media for the death of his mother Princess Diana, who died in a car crash in a Paris tunnel in 1997 while being chased by press photographers.

He has also cited media attacks on Meghan as one of the main reasons behind their decision to abandon their roles as senior, working members of the royal family and move to the U.S. in 2020.

Senate approves bill to fund government into December

Washington — The Senate approved a continuing resolution on Saturday to keep the government funded through Dec. 11, sending the bill to the House as Congress looks to avoid a government shutdown ahead of the midterm elections this fall. In a 90 to 6 vote, the Senate approved the measure, which would keep the government funded at current levels with some exceptions for six weeks beyond the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year. It now goes to the House, where lawmakers have pursued a different approach. Before leaving town for its August recess, the House approved a separate continuing resolution that would also fund the government into December. But the GOP-led bill was passed with widespread opposition from Democrats. In the Senate, which has a 60-vote threshold to advance most legislation, GOP leaders pursued a bipartisan approach to the funding extension — acknowledging the need for support across the aisle. Top Republican and Democratic appropriators in the Senate announced on Sunday an agreement on a stopgap funding bill. Democrats touted, among other wins, a provision in the bill closing a loophole preventing the administration from transferring funds to Border Patrol, after they refused to fund immigration enforcement agencies earlier this year. GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, praised the stopgap funding measure for avoiding "any poison pills." Democrats had sought additional provisions that could have imperiled its passage. But one provision could still pose hurdles in the House, should it take up the bill when it returns from recess later this month. The bill includes language to temporarily prevent political appointees in the administration from implementing a proposed rule about federal grants. Democrats have warned that the rule will allow the administration to cancel grants and "take even more federal funding hostage," and have sought to permanently ban the rule. But even the temporary ban could cause the measure to lose support among Republicans. If House Speaker Mike Johnson moves forward with the Senate bill, it could pick up support from Democrats to propel it to passage. But whether pressure from members of his own conference pushes him to pursue a different course remains to be seen.The Senate approved the measure as it churned through a number of priorities while preparing to depart for a five-week August recess. The House is set to return from its recess on Aug. 31, at which point the lower chamber will have a matter of weeks to coalesce behind a plan to keep the government funded. For the bulk of lawmakers, following two record breaking government shutdowns within the last 12 months, the appetite for another funding lapse appears low. And with the midterm elections quickly approaching, both sides of the aisle appear inclined to push off the fight for now. 
Read Next Story