“Extensive” phone hacking by the Mirror Group newspapers was carried out from 2006 to 2011, a High Court judge has ruled after a privacy case brought by Prince Harry.
Judge Mr Justice Fancourt said that “even to some extent”, the phone hacking continued during the Leveson Inquiry into media standards.
The Duke of Sussex’s case has been “proved in part”, with 15 of the 33 articles presented in court found to be the product of phone hacking or other unlawful information gathering, the judge ruled.
He went on to say the Duke’s phone was probably only hacked to a modest extent and was “carefully controlled by certain people” from the end of 2003 to April 2009.
But the judge added there was a tendency by the Duke to assume everything was a result of hacking.
The judge awarded Prince Harry a total sum of £140,600. The sum was aggregated as directors of the newspaper group knew and “turned a blind eye and positively concealed it”.
In a statement read by his lawyer David Sherborne, Prince Harry said: “This case is not just about hacking, it is about a systemic practice of unlawful and appalling behaviour, followed by coverups and destruction of evidence.”
The court found that within Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), principle board directors, senior executives and editors “such as Piers Morgan clearly knew about or were involved in these illegal activities,” he said.
Advertisement
Image: David Sherborne reads a statement, on behalf of the Duke of Sussex, outside court
“Between them, they even went as far as lying under oath to parliament during the Leveson inquiry, to the stock exchange, and to us all ever since.”
Since the claim was brought, the prince said: “Defamatory stories and intimidating tactics have been deployed against me and at my family’s expense.”
“I am happy to have won the case, especially as this trial only looked at a quarter of my entire claim.”
The prince called on the stock market and the police to “do their duty” and investigate bringing charges against the company and those who have broken the law.
“Today’s ruling is vindicating and affirming. I have been told that slaying dragons will get you burned, but in light of today’s victory and the importance of doing what is needed for a free and honest press, it is a worthwhile price to pay.”
Coronation Street actor awarded damages
Meanwhile, Coronation Street actor Michael Le Vell was awarded £31,650 in damages after the judge found four out of the 27 articles presented to court were the product of phone hacking or unlawful information gathering.
Mr Justice Fancourt said the claims of soap actress Nikki Sanderson and the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse, Fiona Wightman, are barred because times for their claims have expired.
But he found that nine articles relating to Ms Sanderson and one article related to Ms Wightman were the product of unlawful information gathering.
The judge found there was “some unlawful activity” at the newspaper group in 1995, and “widespread” unlawful information gathering from 1996.
The practice was “widespread and habitual” from 1998 onwards, the judge said, while phone hacking “remained an important tool in the climate of journalism” at all three papers – the Daily Mirror, the Sunday Mirror and Sunday People – from 2006 to 2011.
But phone hacking and unlawful information gathering were then done “in a more controlled way” and not as habitually as before 2006.
Private investigators ‘integral part’ of Mirror newspapers
Unlawful information gathering involving private investigators hired by MGN “reduced in amount” between 2006 and 2011 but “remained extensive” throughout the whole period.
Some 11 private investigators – out of 51 complained about in the case – were used “very substantially” by journalists and editors and an “integral part of the system” that existed at the three papers.
Another 13 did a “significant amount” of unlawful information gathering while five did “some work” that appears to have involved in unlawful gathering.
There was “no sufficient evidence” for 14 of the private investigators in this case while ten others who were based abroad would have been breaking the law in England and Wales, but can’t have findings made about them because it was outside the jurisdiction.
Two directors knew about phone hacking
Meanwhile, two directors at MGN – Paul Vickers and Sly Bailey – knew about phone hacking but they did not inform the rest of the board, the judge found.
“It was concealed from the board, Parliament, the public, the Leveson Inquiry,” the judge said.
A spokesperson for MGN said: “We welcome today’s judgment that gives the business the necessary clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago.
“Where historical wrongdoing took place, we apologise unreservedly, have taken full responsibility and paid appropriate compensation.”
The Duke of Sussex sued MGN for damages, claiming journalists at its titles were linked to controversial methods including phone hacking, so-called “blagging” and the use of private investigators for unlawful activities.
The civil trial at the High Court ended in June after seven weeks and saw the duke appear in the witness box – the first time a senior royal has given evidence in a courtroom since the 19th Century.
His lawyer David Sherborne told the court unlawful information gathering against the duke began in January 1996 when he was 11 years old.
Mr Sherborne said the 33 articles which form Harry’s case are just a fraction of the 2,500 the royal identified as being published about him between 1996 and 2009.
MGN contested the claims and either denied or not admitted to each of them. The publisher also argued that some of the claimants have brought their legal action too late.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.
Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
You can receive Breaking News alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News App. You can also follow @SkyNews on X or subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.
Marnie’s first serious relationship came when she was 16-years-old.
Warning: This article contains references to strangulation, coercive control and domestic abuse.
She was naturally excited when a former friend became her first boyfriend.
But after a whirlwind few months, everything changed with a slow, determined peeling away of her personality.
“There was isolation, then it was the phone checking,” says Marnie.
As a survivor of abuse, we are not using her real name.
“When I would go out with my friends or do something, I’d get constant phone calls and messages,” she says.
“I wouldn’t be left alone to sort of enjoy my time with my friends. Sometimes he might turn up there, because I just wasn’t trusted to just go and even do something minor like get my nails done.”
Image: The internet is said to be helping to fuel a rise in domestic abuse among teens. Pic: iStock
He eventually stopped her from seeing friends, shouted at her unnecessarily, and accused her of looking at other men when they would go out.
If she ever had any alone time, he would bombard her with calls and texts; she wasn’t allowed to do anything without him knowing where she was.
He monitored her phone constantly.
“Sometimes I didn’t even know someone had messaged me.
“My mum maybe messaged to ask me where I was. He would delete the message and put my phone away, so then I wouldn’t even have a clue my mum had tried to reach me.”
The toll of what Marnie experienced was only realised 10 years later when she sought help for frequent panic attacks.
She struggled to comprehend the damage her abuser had inflicted when she was diagnosed with PTSD.
This is what psychological abuse and coercive control looks like.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:56
‘His hands were on my throat – he didn’t stop’
Young women and girls in the UK are increasingly falling victim, with incidents of domestic abuse spiralling among under-25s.
Exclusive data shared with Sky News, gathered by domestic abuse charity Refuge, reveals a disturbing rise in incidents between April 2024 and March 2025.
Psychological abuse was the most commonly reported form of harm, affecting 73% of young women and girls.
Of those experiencing this form of manipulation, 49% said their perpetrator had threatened to harm them and a further 35% said their abuser had threatened to kill them.
Among the 62% of 16-25 year olds surveyed who had reported suffering from physical violence, half of them said they had been strangled or suffocated.
Earlier this year, Sky News reported that school children were asking for advice on strangulation, but Kate Lexen, director of services at charity Tender, says children as young as nine are asking about violent pornography and displaying misogynistic behaviour.
Image: Kate Lexen, director of services at charity Tender
“What we’re doing is preventing what those misogynistic behaviours can then escalate onto,” Ms Lexen says.
Tender has been running workshops and lessons on healthy relationships in primary and secondary schools and colleges for over 20 years.
Children as young as nine ‘talking about strangulation’
Speaking to Sky News, Ms Lexen says new topics are being brought up in sessions, which practitioners and teachers are adapting to.
“We’re finding those Year 5 and Year 6 students, so ages 9, 10 and 11, are talking about strangulation, they’re talking about attitudes that they’ve read online and starting to bring in some of those attitudes from some of those misogynistic influencers.
“There are ways that they’re talking about and to their female teachers.
“We’re finding that from talking to teachers as well that they are really struggling to work out how to broach these topics with the students that they are working with and how to make that a really safe space and open space to have those conversations in an age-appropriate way, which can be very challenging.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:58
Hidden domestic abuse deaths
Charities like Tender exist to prevent domestic abuse and sexual violence.
Ms Lexen says without tackling misogynistic behaviours “early on with effective prevention education” then the repercussions, as the data for under 25s proves, will be “astronomical”.
At Refuge, it is already evident. Elaha Walizadeh, senior programme manager for children and young people, says the charity has seen a rise in referrals since last year.
Image: Elaha Walizadeh, senior programme manager for children and young people at Refuge
“We have also seen the dynamics of abuse changing,” she adds. “So with psychological abuse being reported, we’ve seen a rise in that and non-fatal strangulation cases, we’ve seen a rise in as well.
“Our frontline workers are telling us that the young people are telling them usually abuse starts from smaller signs. So things like coercive control, where the perpetrators are stopping them from seeing friends and family. It then builds.”
Misogyny to violent behaviour might seem like a leap.
But experts and survivors are testament to the fact that it is happening.
It says human rights in the UK “worsened” in 2024, with “credible reports of serious restrictions on freedom of expression”, as well as “crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by antisemitism” since the 7 October Hamas attack against Israel.
On free speech, while “generally provided” for, the report cites “specific areas of concern” around limits on “political speech deemed ‘hateful’ or ‘offensive'”.
Sir Keir Starmer has previously defended the UK’s record on free speech after concerns were raised by Mr Vance.
In response to the report, a UK government spokesperson said: “Free speech is vital for democracy around the world including here in the UK, and we are proud to uphold freedoms whilst keeping our citizens safe.”
Image: Keir Starmer and JD Vance have clashed in the past over free speech in the UK. Pics: PA
The US report highlights Britain’s public space protection orders, which allow councils to restrict certain activities in some public places to prevent antisocial behaviour.
It also references “safe access zones” around abortion clinics, which the Home Office says are designed to protect women from harassment or distress.
They have been criticised by Mr Vance before, notably back in February during a headline-grabbing speech at the Munich Security Conference.
Ministers have said the Online Safety Act is about protecting children, and repeatedly gone so far as to suggest people who are opposed to it are on the side of predators.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:23
Why do people want to repeal the Online Safety Act?
The report comes months after Sir Keir bit back at Mr Vance during a summit at the White House, cutting in when Donald Trump’s VP claimed there are “infringements on free speech” in the UK.
“We’ve had free speech for a very long time, it will last a long time, and we are very proud of that,” the PM said.
But Mr Vance again raised concerns during a meeting with Foreign Secretary David Lammy at his country estate in Kent last week, saying he didn’t want the UK to go down a “very dark path” of losing free speech.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The Trump administration itself has been accused of trying to curtail free speech and stifle criticism, most notably by targeting universities – Harvard chief among them.