EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry Faces Bankruptcy Fears Over 'Multi-Million Legal Bill'
Prince Harry is now facing bankruptcy fears over a multi-million-dollar legal bill.
July 30 2026, Published 4:15 p.m. ET
Prince Harry is facing the prospect of a multimillion-dollar legal bill after lawyers for the publisher of the Daily Mail argued he and six fellow claimants should pay costs on a stricter basis following the collapse of their unlawful information-gathering case – raising concerns insurance may not cover the full amount.
As RadarOnline.com has reported, the 41-year-old Duke of Sussex joined a group of seven high-profile claimants, including Sir Elton John, Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost, David Furnish and former MP Sir Simon Hughes in legal action against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), the publisher of the Daily Mail.
Fear Prince Harry Could Face Complete Bankruptcy
Prince Harry faces a massive legal bill after losing his court case.
The group alleged unlawful information gathering – claims ANL consistently denied.
Earlier this month, after an 11-week trial in London's High Court, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed the claims in their entirety in a 436-page ruling.
The case has now returned to court to determine who should bear legal costs that exceed $45.5million, with ANL arguing it should recover costs on an indemnity basis rather than the standard basis, potentially leaving the claimants exposed to millions of dollars in additional liabilities.
A legal source familiar with the proceedings exclusively told Radar: "The financial stakes are now enormous. If the court awards costs on the indemnity basis, the insurance arranged by the claimants may fall well short of the total amount owed, leaving individuals to meet substantial sums themselves. There is a real fear in some circles this could bankrupt Harry."
Tabloid Bosses Slam Harry's Legal Campaign
Elton John and Elizaebeth Hurley joined Harry in the High Court suit.
Antony White KC, representing ANL, argued the claims had not been brought solely to resolve legal disputes.
He said: "The cases were brought for a collateral purpose."
White argued the litigation was intended to increase pressure on the government to launch the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry, describing it as "a campaign rather than ordinary and reasonable litigation."
He also said: "They knew that this was an all-out attack on Associated. They were at pains to emphasise that there were others who could join the bandwagon."
White further argued that the claims had been launched with significant publicity in October 2022 and criticized the breadth of the allegations, saying the claimants had cast a "strikingly wide" net in the hope of uncovering evidence.
He also described Baroness Lawrence as having been "recruited as the national treasure" in the case, adding this was a "matter of regret" for his client.
Insufficient Insurance Sparks Financial Panic
Associated Newspapers denied unlawful actions.
Nicholas Bacon KC, representing the group of claimants, urged the court not to award costs on the more punitive indemnity basis, arguing the consequences could be severe because the group's combined insurance cover totals approximately $21.7million.
He said: "At that level of cover, the claimants would reasonably expect to be insured for the total of Associated's incurred costs and approved estimated costs."
Bacon warned: "If the claimants were required to pay Associated's costs on the indemnity basis, however, the current level of cover would be insufficient to meet their total costs exposure, possibly to the tune of many millions of pounds."
Astounding Legal Bills Surge Past $45 Million
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
The legal source feared possible bankruptcy for Harry.
He also criticized ANL's legal spending, telling the court its costs had reached almost $46.2million, exceeding its approved budget by more than $24.9million.
Bacon said: "The above figures reflect an astonishingly high legal spend by Associated and an entirely cavalier approach to the principle of proportionality and the overriding objective, which seeks to ensure that parties are on an equal footing."
He maintained the claimants had "conducted themselves honestly and in good faith" throughout the litigation, adding the court had accepted much of their evidence and had not found any claimant to have acted dishonestly.
He also argued the case "was neither speculative nor weak" and that, while the group accepted they should pay ANL's legal costs following their defeat, "it would, however, be unjust to make an order that they do so on the indemnity basis."
Mr Justice Nicklin is expected to issue a written ruling on costs after the hearing concludes.
