Kate claim will not go to trial between Harry and Mail publisher, judge says

An allegation that the Princess of Wales’s phone was targeted by a private investigator cannot go to an upcoming trial between the publisher of the Daily Mail and a group including the Duke of Sussex, a High Court judge has said.

Harry is one of a group of seven high-profile individuals bringing legal action against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).

The group, also including Sir Elton John, Baroness Doreen Lawrence and Liz Hurley, have accused the publisher of allegedly carrying out or commissioning unlawful activities such as hiring private investigators to place listening devices inside cars, “blagging” private records and accessing private phone conversations.

ANL firmly denies the allegations and is defending the legal action, previously describing the claims as “lurid” and “simply preposterous”.

At a preliminary hearing earlier this month, lawyers for the group and the publisher returned to the High Court in London ahead of an expected trial in January 2026.

David Sherborne, for the group, told the hearing that a record from a private investigator allegedly shows a journalist commissioning him to provide a “mobile phone conversion” related to Kate, as well as phone numbers from a “family and friends” list.

In a ruling on Friday, Mr Justice Nicklin refused a bid to add the allegation to the case.

He said: “If the amendment were allowed it would open up a significant new area of investigation for Associated and it is too late given the proximity of the trial date.”

Antony White KC, for ANL, made a bid to have allegations that two Mail on Sunday journalists burgled the home of Michael Ward in 1992 and stole documents thrown out ahead of the trial.

And in his judgment, Mr Justice Nicklin agreed.

He said: “Even if proved true, they cannot assist in the fair resolution of the claimants’ claims. It is not alleged that this incident has any connection with any claimant, or any pleaded journalist.”

In his 16-page ruling, the judge said that resolving this allegation had become “extremely complex” and an “involved side-show”.

He continued: “The events took place over 30 years ago. This is not a small area of the case. It is now a substantial dispute of fact…Put bluntly, it has become a complex and involved side-show.”

The PA news agency understands that lawyers representing the group of seven, which also includes David Furnish, Sadie Frost and Sir Simon Hughes, will make a bid to appeal against Mr Justice Nicklin’s ruling as wrong in fact and in law.

Later in his decision, the judge said it would not be helpful to deciding the individuals’ claims to determine whether unlawful information gathering was “widely and habitually carried out” at ANL.

He continued: “Quite simply, establishing whether unlawful information gathering was widespread and/or habitual at Associated is the territory of a public inquiry. It is not necessary to determine that issue for the fair resolution of the claimants’ claims.”

The judge said he would exclude allegations “which are not relevant and probative” from the trial and prevent the case from becoming “an uncontrolled and wide-ranging investigation akin to a public inquiry”.

However, Mr Justice Nicklin said that the group of high-profile individuals can use previous incidents of unlawful information gathering involving a journalist while they were at a different paper in their claims.

At the two-day hearing earlier this month, the High Court in London heard a claim that information about the Prince of Wales’s 21st birthday party could have been “blagged” by a private investigator.

Mr Sherborne said in written submissions that invoices were disclosed on September 24, including one related to the Prince of Wales.

The invoice, dated August 25 2003, was entitled “Out of Africa Story Royal Party Enqs”, the barrister continued.

Mr Sherborne claimed that this invoice was linked to a Daily Mail story from June 2003, with “extensive” details about William’s 21st birthday party which had an “out of Africa” theme, the day before the party was due to take place.

“It can be inferred… that information for the article was obtained through blagging,” Mr Sherborne continued.

A further preliminary hearing is expected to take place next month.