Prince Harry and Celebrities Ordered to Pay £9.5M to Daily Mail Publisher After Lost Lawsuit

Prince Harry and six other high-profile claimants must pay a £9.54m interim payment towards the Daily Mail publisher’s legal costs by 28 August 2026, after losing their high court case over allegations of unlawful information gathering, according to a ruling by Mr Justice Nicklin reported by The Guardian. Associated Newspapers Ltd strongly denied the claims, which were dismissed after an 11-week trial in London.

The High Court ruling delivered on 21 August 2026 orders the Duke of Sussex, along with co-claimants including Doreen Lawrence, Elton John, David Furnish, Sadie Frost, Liz Hurley, and Simon Hughes, to settle the multi-million-pound interim bill. According to The Guardian, lawyers for the claimants had argued that the interim payment should be restricted to just over £7.9m, but the judge set the figure at £9.54m to be paid by 4 pm.

Indemnity Basis Costs Ordered for Associated Newspapers

Mr Justice Nicklin ruled that Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) is entitled to have its legal costs determined on an indemnity basis, aside from where prior orders were made, as reported by The Guardian. This legal standard means the losing parties must contribute to ANL’s costs without the publisher needing to demonstrate that every expense was reasonable and proportionate.

The judge noted in his 44-page ruling that an indemnity basis requires circumstances outside of the norm. According to The Guardian, Nicklin stated that the litigation involved a combination of conduct and circumstances that took the proceedings far outside ordinary civil disputes.

Court Criticisms of Claimants’ Conduct and Claims

The court’s decision to award costs on a stricter basis stemmed from several factors, including the speculative character of the claims at their origin and the exceptional breadth of the cases, according to The Guardian. Nicklin cited the public presentation of serious allegations of criminality and impropriety that were not ultimately established during the trial.

According to The Guardian, the judge criticized the group for maintaining very serious allegations against many individuals without reassessing them when evidence required it. Nicklin described that specific conduct as unreasonable to a high degree and refused to cap the overall costs.

Publisher Response and Next Steps in Legal Proceedings

ANL released a statement describing the ruling as a devastating critique of an attempt to destroy a newspaper and the reputations of its journalists, editors, and executives, as reported by The Guardian. The publisher maintained that the outrageous claims should never have been brought forward.

Simon Hughes expressed disappointment and surprise that the judge declined to limit the costs, according to The Guardian. The court has granted both sides until 2 October 2026 to lodge permission to appeal against either the initial trial judgment or the latest costs ruling.