Prince Harry receives ‘substantial’ payout after phone hacking scandal

Prince Harry could get more than a million dollars after settling a court case over 115 newspaper articles he claimed came from hacked calls.

Harry gets huge payout after scandal. (Photo by Daniel LEAL / AFP)

Prince Harry will receive a “substantial” payout from a British newspaper, that hacked his phone for stories, to bring the case to an end.

The prince had already been awarded £140,600 ($268,000) in damages in December after the High Court in London found at least 15 stories published by Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) about the prince were a result of his phone being illegally hacked into.

On Friday, UK time, Harry’s legal team made an offer to the media company to settle the rest of the case, which it accepted.

In a statement shortly afterwards the Duke of Sussex stated that the ex-editor of the Mirror newspaper, and now TV personality and commentator, Piers Morgan “knew perfectly well” what was happening at the paper when he was in charge.

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, arrives at the Royal Courts of Justice, Britain's High Court, in central London on March 28, 2023. (Photo by Daniel LEAL / AFP)

While the settlement amount has not been disclosed, the BBC has reported that the royal will receive £300,000 ($581,000).

Prince Harry’s lawyer David Sherborne said MGN will also pay the Duke £400,000 ($774,500) to cover his legal fees.

With the various payouts and recovered legal costs it could see more than a million dollars go into the Sussex’s bank account.

It’s thought the legal costs of MGN – which is now owned by UK media giant Reach – could top £2 million ($3.87m).

The settlement means subsequent trials, to examine possible illegal activity that led to 115 further stories about the prince, will now not take place. But it also means that if the prince had won those cases he could have been awarded even greater damages.

With the court case finished, Prince Harry, who is now back in the US, took aim at Piers Morgan who edited the Mirror paper between 1995 and 2004.

In a statement via his solicitor Mr Sherborne, Harry said Morgan “knew perfectly well” what was happening when he edited the paper.

“Even his own employer realised it simply could not call him as a witness of truth at the trial.

“His contempt for the court’s ruling and his continued attacks ever since demonstrate why it was so important to obtain a clear and detailed Judgement.”

Prince Harry has taken aim at Britain’s tabloid newspapers. AFP PHOTO / DANIEL SORABJI

Morgan denies Harry accusations

It’s a claim that Morgan has vehemently denied. In December he said he had “zero knowledge” of the one article about Prince Harry that could be directly linked to phone hacking while he was editor.

He said he had “never hacked a phone” while editor or told anyone else to do so.

“Nobody has provided any actual evidence to prove that I did.”

In Friday’s statement, Harry continued: “I believe in the positive change it will bring for all of us. It’s the very reason why I started this, and why I will continue to see it through to the end.”

Ex Mirror editor Piers Morgan. Picture: Supplied

At least 15 stories from hacking

The royal claimed he was targeted for 15 years and more than 140 stories published in MGN’s newspapers were a result of unlawful information gathering.

The December trial only considered 33 of these, with Justice Timothy Fancourt ruling 15 of the sample articles were “the product of phone hacking … or the product of other unlawful information gathering”.

In his judgment, Justice Fancourt said Prince Harry had a “tendency” to assume all articles about him were the products of hacking, though he was right on some occasions.

“I have found the duke’s case of voicemail interception and unlawful information gathering proved in part only,” Justice Fancourt said.

Prince Harry’s solicitor David Sherborne reads a written statement on behalf of the duke. (Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images)

“I consider that his phone was only hacked to a modest extent and that this was probably carefully controlled by certain people at each newspaper.

“However, it did happen on occasions from about the end of 2003 to April 2009 (which was the date of the last article that I examined).

“There was a tendency for the duke in his evidence to assume that everything published was the product of voicemail interception because phone hacking was rife within Mirror Group at the time.

“But, phone hacking was not the only journalistic tool at the time and his claims in relation to the other 18 articles did not stand up to careful analysis.”

In his judgment on the case in December Judge Timothy Fancourt, said there could “be no doubt” Piers Morgan knew that hacking was taking place and that he and ex-Mirror CEO Sly Bailey “turned a blind eye”.

MGN apologised for the confirmed hacking incidents.

In a statement, a spokesman for the publisher said: “We welcome today’s judgment that gives the business the necessary clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago”.

“Where historical wrongdoing took place, we apologise unreservedly, have taken full responsibility and paid appropriate compensation.”