William may have been target of Mail publisher blagging, Harry’s lawyer says

The Prince and Princess of Wales may have been the targets of unlawful information gathering by the Daily Mail’s publisher, lawyers for Prince Harry have told the High Court.

Details about Prince William’s 21st birthday party in the Mail were potentially “blagged” by a private investigator while Catherine’s mobile phone appeared to have been targeted, a preliminary hearing in Harry’s privacy case against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) has heard.

Harry is one of several public figures – including Sir Elton John, Baroness Doreen Lawrence and Elizabeth Hurley – accusing ANL of “grave breaches of privacy”.

ANL has repeatedly denied the “lurid” and “preposterous” allegations.

They include allegations of bugging homes, phone-hacking and dishonestly gathering medical and financial information.

In written submissions, barrister David Sherborne said it could be “inferred” through an invoice that extensive details in a Daily Mail story ahead of Prince William’s birthday party were “obtained through blagging” – meaning dishonestly.

He said the invoice was titled ‘Out of Africa Story Royal Party Enqs’ and dated August 25 2003, a few months after the prince’s Out of Africa-themed party in June.

Mr Sherborne added that a separate record allegedly showed a journalist commissioning a private investigator to provide a “mobile phone conversion” related to Catherine and phone numbers from a “family and friends” list.

Wednesday’s hearing saw both sides argue about which allegations should be included in the claim when it goes to trial in early 2026.

Two of the other claimants, Sir Elton’s husband David Furnish and actress Sadie Frost, were present in court, while Prince Harry appeared to listen to proceedings remotely.

Lawyers for the Mail’s publisher argued parts of the claim should be thrown out because they involved “general” allegations of unlawful information gathering or related to other newspaper groups.

Antony White KC said only “specific instances” should be considered to “allow a trial of clearly identified factual issues to take place in a fair and proportionate manner”.

He added: “In several instances, it is unclear if the relevant targeting is even said to have been done on behalf of ANL, because the pleading is rolled up with an allegation that the relevant journalist worked at Mirror Group Newspapers and/or News Group Newspapers.”

Prince Harry has previously settled years-long cases against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) News Group Newspapers (NGN) over alleged unlawful information gathering.

Mr White said: “Unparticularised general allegations of UIG [unlawful information gathering], particularly where these involve other journalists, or ANL more generally, will not be of assistance to the court in determining the claimants’ individual claims.”

Mr Sherborne said the bid to throw out parts of the claim was largely “unreasonably and unfairly late” and should be dismissed.

The two-day hearing is due to conclude on Thursday, with a decision expected at a later date. The trial is due to take place in January and could last up to nine weeks.

It emerged in 2022 that the prince and others were taking ANL to court, with some of the allegations dating back decades.

The publisher failed to get the case thrown out in 2023 by arguing the claims had been brought “far too late”.

Lawyers for the claimants successfully argued that new evidence had come to light, and they did not know how information was being covertly acquired at the time.

ANL’s lawyers have staunchly denied the allegations, previously calling the case “without foundation” and an “affront” to hard-working journalists whose reputations had been disparaged.

A spokesperson for ANL has previously said it had “denied under oath that its journalists had commissioned or obtained information derived from phone hacking, phone tapping, bugging, computer or email hacking or burglary to order”.

The statement added: “The stories concerned, many of which were published 20 or more years ago, and not subject to any complaint at the time, were the product of responsible journalism based on legitimate sources”.

This is the latest newspaper publisher against which Harry has brought legal action over information gathering.