The trial against Associated Newspapers Limited (“ANL”), publisher of the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, and MailOnline, commenced in January 2026 and has attracted significant public attention. The proceedings are brought by seven claimants, including Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex; Sir Elton John and his husband, David Furnish; Baroness Doreen Lawrence OBE, Elizabeth Hurley, Sir Simon Hughes and Sadie Frost, who allege that ANL engaged in unlawful information gathering (“UIG”) over an extended period between 1993 and 2011.
The claimants contend that journalists and agents acting on behalf of ANL systematically used unlawful methods such as phone hacking, bugging, blagging, and the commissioning of private investigators to obtain private and confidential information. To date, the Court has heard opening submissions from both parties and evidence from several of the Claimants. Each Claimant relies on articles published in ANL’s newspapers in support of their case, apart from Sir Simon Hughes, whose claim centres on an alleged incident involving a Mail on Sunday journalist.
Opening Submissions
In his opening statements, David Sherborne, the lead counsel for the Claimants, described what he has characterised as “clear systemic and sustained” use of unlawful information gathering practices at both the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday. He argued that statements made by ANL representatives at the 2011 Levinson Inquiry, in which the publishers denied engaging in unlawful conduct, were “simply not true.”
Mr Sherborne referred the Court to documentary and witness evidence concerning ANL’s alleged use of private investigators. He highlighted material suggesting that journalists and editors were aware that information was being obtained unlawfully and nevertheless continued to commission such work. Emphasis was placed on evidence of payments allegedly made in cash, which, the Claimants argue, demonstrates an attempt to avoid leaving an audit trail.
ANL’s opening submissions by Antony White KC, representing ANL, rejected these allegations in their entirety. He described the claims as “threadbare” and argued that they were brought outside the applicable six-year limitation period. Mr White also maintained that ANL obtained information through lawful means, including public records, publicists, and legitimate journalistic sources, and denied any involvement in unlawful practices.
Evidence from the Claimants
Prince Harry was the first Claimant to give evidence in Court. His case focuses on 14 articles published between 2001 and 2013, which he says contained private and confidential information relating to his personal relationships, including with former girlfriend Chelsea Davy and former nanny Tiggy Legge-Bourke. During cross-examination, Mr White questioned why the Prince did not complain of the articles at the time of publication. Prince Harry responded that, as a member of the Royal Family he was conditioned by the institution to “never complain, never explain.”
Prince Harry was also questioned about his relationships with journalists bylined on the articles. While acknowledging that he was aware of certain journalists, including Katie Nicholl, Prince Harry denied that they were friends or that she was part of his ‘social circle.’ At times during his cross-examination, Mr Justice Nicklin reminded the Duke to confine his answers to the questions asked. Prince Harry apologised stating that he previously had a bad experience in Court, most likely referring to his 2023 lawsuit against Mirror Group Newspapers. The Duke later became visibly emotional, explaining that he had never shared information “off the record” with journalists and described the experience as deeply distressing.
On 22 January 2026, Elizabeth Hurley gave evidence. She explained that the articles relied upon in her claim, were in her words, “in essence true”, but argued that this accuracy was the result of unlawful surveillance, including the alleged bugging of her home and her landline. When challenged on the possibility of leaks from within her personal circle, Ms Hurley denied this and maintained that her privacy had been invaded.
Mr White questioned Ms Hurley extensively on her knowledge of the press reform group Hacked Off and whether she was aware of their potential legal claims against ANL in as early as 2016. Ms Hurley strongly disagreed with the suggestion that she had such knowledge and expressed frustration, several times, with the line of questioning, stating that the case itself amounted to a renewed invasion of privacy.
Sadie Frost gave evidence the following morning. Her claim relates to 11 articles published about her, including reporting on an ectopic pregnancy. Ms Frost stated that she did not initially pursue complaints as she was raising her young children and was unaware at the time that her voicemail may have been hacked. She explained that the precision of information reported led her to believe her voicemails had been accessed unlawfully.
Ms Frost denied being shown evidence of a potential claim prior to October 2016 and rejected suggestions that she had encouraged others, including Kate Moss, to join the litigation. She told the court that the process had been “very demanding” and “very distressing”.
Sir Simon Hughes, the former Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrats, appeared in court to give evidence on 27 January 2026. His claim concerns an alleged incident of unlawful information gathering involving a Mail on Sunday journalist. Sir Simon confirmed that he had previously brought and settled a claim against News Group Newspapers in 2021. He stated that he did not become aware of any potential information regarding a claim against ANL until 2022.
Mr White suggested that Sir Simon had knowledge as early as 2016 that claims against ANL were being developed, which Sir Simon denied. During questioning Mr Justice Nicklin reminded Mr Hughes of his right not to answer questions that might incriminate him. In re-examination, Sir Simon strongly rejected the suggestions that he had participated in any “dishonest conspiracy” or given any untruthful evidence.
The most recent Claimant to give evidence is Baroness Doreen Lawrence. Her case relies on five articles published between 1997 and 2007 following the murder of her son, Stephen Lawrence, in 1993. Baroness Lawrence told the Court that she never gave telephone interviews and had not engaged with the Daily Mail. She further explained that she would have private meetings with the police and articles would often appear the following day laying out what was discussed in said meetings. Baroness Lawrence said that she trusted the publisher at the time in order to get justice for her son’s murder but now believes that the trust was misplaced, and her grief exploited.
Ongoing Proceedings
The Court is yet to hear evidence from Sir Elton John and David Furnish. The Defendant continues to argue that the claims are time-barred, asserting that the claimants were, or should have been, aware of the alleged wrongdoing before October 2016. With the trial listed to continue for several weeks, further evidence and legal arguments are anticipated as the case develops.
For more information on Daily Mail Phone Hacking Claims
Taylor Hampton is currently in the early stages of investigating claims against ANL. If you believe your private information has been misused or believe you may have been targeted by ANL, please contact our specialist teams by emailing [email protected]. A member of our team will get in touch with you to arrange a confidential call. See our phone hacking legal services page HERE.