Prince Harry and Co-Claimants Facing $13.3Million Legal Bill After Humiliating Privacy Lawsuit Loss
Prince Harry and his co-claimants could be on the hook for at least $13.3million to ANL.
July 29 2026, Published 6:45 p.m. ET
Prince Harry and his co-claimants from their phone hacking case may have to shell out at least $13.3million to Associated Newspapers Limited, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
Day one of the two-day hearing in a London court on Wednesday, July 29 saw lawyers for the Daily Mail's publisher lay out what the company believes it is owed, following a judge's final dismissal of the unlawful information and invasion of privacy claims on June 7.
ANL Seeking 'Indemnity Basis' Costs Order Against Prince Harry & Fellow Claimants
Prince Harry and his claimants could face a higher than expected penalty due to an 'indemnity basis' costs order.
ANL’s attorney Anthony White claimed the case brought by Harry, Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley and four others was "a banquet of litigation" based on "baseless allegations" and that the company racked up $45million in legal fees to defend itself.
White urged the court to impose the higher "indemnity basis" costs order, arguing that the conduct of the claimants' case went far beyond what is normally expected in litigation.
An indemnity basis is a harsher legal costs order that allows the winning side to recover more of its legal expenses than under the court's standard rules.
ANL Wants $13.3Million As Interim Payment
ANL wants at least $13,3mllion as an interim payment while Prince Harry and his side offered only $10million.
The publishing house requested an interim payment of $13.3million from the claimants, who offered only $10million as an advance payment and claimed to have a total of $21million in insurance coverage to pay ANL.
“Of course, the (claimants) accept that their claims have been dismissed and it is appropriate that an order for costs on the standard basis follows the event,” ANL's court submission read.
The claimants' lawyer, Nicholas Bacon, called ANL's financial request "eye-watering."
Prince Harry Denied Having 'Leaky' Friends Who Gave Tabloids Stories About Him
Prince Harry tried to claim ANL's 'sources' came from unlawful information gathering.
Harry and the six other claimants began their legal war against the British tabloid almost four years ago, filing their suit in October 2022.
The lawsuit accused ANL's publications The Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday of waging a decades-long campaign of unlawful information gathering, including alleged phone hacking, bugging homes and cars, and hiring private investigators to dig up dirt.
The trial finally began on January 19 at the High Court in London, where Harry gave his testimony two days later.
The prince denied claims he was surrounded by "leaky" friends who tipped off the press, but ANL persuaded the court that numerous stories had come from sources within Harry's own circle rather than through unlawful information gathering.
Prince Harry Claimed Dismissal of His Case Was a 'WhiteWash'
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.
Prince Harry slammed the judge's decision to dismiss all 97 claims from his side.
In a massive 436-page ruling, Justice Matthew Nicklin dismissed all 97 claims brought by Harry and his side in a humiliating loss.
Nicklin scolded the plaintiffs in the judgment, writing, "In substance, the claimants' case invites the Court to conclude that, because the information was private and because Associated cannot positively explain how it was sourced, the article must have been unlawfully sourced. That is not a permissible approach."
ANL said it would seek to recover some of the nearly $67million the company claimed it spent during the four-year legal battle.
“Associated Newspapers thanks Mr. Justice Nicklin for the patience and wisdom he has displayed throughout this misguided legal action, which has wasted so much valuable court time and more than £50m in legal costs," the company said in a statement.
It added, "We will look to resolve outstanding issues, including the recovery of the costs we have incurred while defending ourselves against this egregious litigation."
Harry and co-claimant Baroness Doreen Lawrence blasted Nicklin's decision, calling it a "complete and obvious whitewash."
