Prince Harry Back In Court For Phone Hacking Hearing Finale
LONDON (AP) — Prince Harry returned to a London court Thursday as his lawyer fought to keep his phone hacking lawsuit against a British tabloid publisher alive.
The Duke of Sussex arrived after lunch for the conclusion of a four-day High Court hearing on his invasion of privacy case against the company that publishes The Daily Mail. His presence during three days of the legal wrangling indicates the lawsuit’s importance in the prince’s broader battle against the British press.
Harry, Elton John, actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost are among a group of seven people suing Associated Newspapers Ltd. for allegedly paying private investigators to illegally bug homes and cars and to record phone conversations.
The publisher denied the allegations and has argued that lawsuits based on alleged incidents dating as far back as 1993 should be thrown out because the cases were not filed within a six-year limitation period.
Attorney David Sherborne, who represents Harry and the other famous claimants, argued that the deadline for filing the lawsuits should be extended because the snooping was covert and the publisher concealed evidence of it through denials “likely to lead the claimants off the scent.”
The judge is expected to rule at a later date.
LONDON (AP) — Prince Harry returned to a London court Thursday as his lawyer fought to keep his phone hacking lawsuit against a British tabloid publisher alive.
The Duke of Sussex arrived after lunch for the conclusion of a four-day High Court hearing on his invasion of privacy case against the company that publishes The Daily Mail. His presence during three days of the legal wrangling indicates the lawsuit’s importance in the prince’s broader battle against the British press.
Harry, Elton John, actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost are among a group of seven people suing Associated Newspapers Ltd. for allegedly paying private investigators to illegally bug homes and cars and to record phone conversations.
The publisher denied the allegations and has argued that lawsuits based on alleged incidents dating as far back as 1993 should be thrown out because the cases were not filed within a six-year limitation period.
Attorney David Sherborne, who represents Harry and the other famous claimants, argued that the deadline for filing the lawsuits should be extended because the snooping was covert and the publisher concealed evidence of it through denials “likely to lead the claimants off the scent.”
The judge is expected to rule at a later date.
