It has been quite the week for Prince Harry. A couple of days ago, he announced that he would be moving his family back to Britain – not in years, or even months, but in a matter of a few weeks.
That story can now be seen in the context of a costs order made against him and his litigants by Mr Justice Nicklin, after the failure of their court case against Associated Newspapers.
Harry may have been attempting to seize the initiative and the headlines with his eye-catching announcement that he was once more returning to the country of his birth after his Montecito sojourn, but the price of his hubris has been revealed, and it is an exceptionally steep one.
The price of his hubris has been revealed, and it is an exceptionally steep one
By the time that Brand Sussex is setting up camp wherever they have decided to live in Britain, Harry will have shelled out his share of just over £9.5 million, along with the likes of Sir Elton John, Baroness Lawrence, Elizabeth Hurley and others. The only hope for the litigants, who accused Associated Newspapers of invading their privacy, was that the judge would allow the costs to be recovered on a ‘standard’ basis, rather than the more punitive ‘indemnity’ basis, which essentially removes an upper limit on costs. It also means that the plaintiffs have to cover their own expenses as well as those of Associated Newspapers.
Harry and co. could not be said to have helped themselves during the trial. Thanks to their legal representative, the flamboyant barrister David Sherborne, the claimants essentially tried to prosecute claims of phone hacking and bugging, despite there being no evidence for these practices at Associated Newspapers.
Mr Justice Nicklin has allowed the indemnity costs because ‘allegations of the utmost seriousness were advanced before the evidential foundation for many of them had been established’ and the ‘exceptional breadth’ of these allegations ‘lacked an adequate evidential foundation’ and had been pursued ‘well outside the norm’. It also probably did not help that Harry’s immediate response to the initial judgment was to decry it as a ‘complete and obvious whitewash’, an unfortunate piece of petulance that may end up costing him very, very dearly indeed.
Quite how dearly remains to be seen. The plaintiffs have been told to fork out an initial £9.5 million in the next week. Associated had asked for £9.9 million, Harry and co. had offered a shade under £8 million – and the rest of the amount will be thrashed out over the next year. Associated have claimed that their costs were £34 million – something the judge has raised a legalistic eyebrow at in his judgement, saying that these ‘exceptionally high’ and ‘largely unexplained’ costs will be assessed at a later date.
Still, this is scant comfort for the litigants, who were insured for a loss up to £16.2 million, but will be facing a considerable shortfall that even the deep-pocketed Sir Elton might blanch at making up. Associated have issued yet another triumphal statement, saying ‘Nicklin’s judgment is a devastating critique of an attempt to destroy a newspaper and the reputations of its journalists, editors and executives’, and, for good measure: ‘This case was a vital element in an insidious strategy by the newspaper-hating zealots of Hacked Off, using fascist, orgy-loving Max Mosley’s millions, and support from Hugh Grant to impose statutory regulation on the press as a whole.’
Whatever you think of anyone involved in the case, it was, as Mr Justice Nicklin’s damning judgment suggests, ‘litigation conceived and pleaded on an unjustifiably wide canvas.’ Its defeat was an important one for the independence of a free press, for journalistic integrity and for teaching self-important blowhard celebrities a painful lesson in not using the British legal system to pursue vendettas against newspapers that published stories about them.
The plaintiffs have until 2 October to decide if they want to appeal – still, this looks to be yet another embarrassment for a group of people who really should have known better. But welcome home, Harry.
Comments