Prince Harry and six other household names are suing the publishers of the Daily Mail newspaper over alleged unlawful information gathering dating back 30 years.
The case has been ongoing since 2022 and is just one of several Harry has filed against media organisations since 2019 over alleged breaches of privacy, unlawful practices and false stories.
Associated Newspapers (ANL) – which also publishes The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline – strongly denies any wrongdoing.
A full trial is not expected to start at London’s High Court until January, but a pre-trial hearing, which helps manage the case and resolve any outstanding issues, is set to take place today.
Here is everything you need to know about the case.
What’s alleged?
The alleged unlawful acts are said to have taken place from 1993 to 2011, including the publisher hiring private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside cars and homes and paying police officials for inside information.
When bringing the lawsuit in 2022, lawyers for the claimants said they had become aware of “highly distressing” evidence revealing they had been victims of “abhorrent criminal activity” and “gross breaches of privacy” by Associated Newspapers.
Associated Newspapers denies the allegations, describing them as “preposterous smears”, and claims the legal action is “a fishing expedition by [the] claimants and their lawyers”.
The accusations include:
• The hiring of private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside people’s cars and homes;
• The commissioning of individuals to surreptitiously listen into and record people’s live, private telephone calls while they were taking place;
• The payment of police officials, with corrupt links to private investigators, for inside, sensitive information;
• The impersonation of individuals to obtain medical information from private hospitals, clinics, and treatment centres by deception;
• The accessing of bank accounts, credit histories and financial transactions through illicit means and manipulation.
Image: Pic: iStock
Who else is involved?
While Prince Harry is one of the key players, as a group litigation, he is not the only claimant.
The others include:
• Actress Elizabeth Hurley • Actress Sadie Frost • Sir Elton John and his husband, filmmaker David Furnish • Baroness Doreen Lawrence, mother of Stephen Lawrence • Former Liberal Democrat politician Sir Simon Hughes
Image: Sadie Frost. Pic: PA
Image: Baroness Doreen Lawrence. Pic: AP
They all allege they have been victims of “abhorrent criminal activity” and “gross breaches of privacy” by ANL.
David Sherborne is the lawyer representing all the claimants.
Image: Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish (below). Pic: AP
Image: Pic: AP
What happened in 2023?
During a preliminary hearing in March 2023, Judge Matthew Nicklin was tasked with ruling whether the case can proceed to trial.
ANL had asked for the case to be struck out entirely, arguing the legal challenges against it were brought “far too late”, but David Sherborne called for the publisher’s application to be dismissed.
Lawyers for the publishers said the claims fell outside the statute of limitations – a law indicating that privacy claims should be brought with six years – and the claimants should have known, or could have found out, they had a potential case before October 2016.
Image: Prince Harry at the High Court in 2023
They also argued some aspects of the cases should be thrown out as they breach orders made by Lord Justice Leveson as part of his 2011 inquiry into media standards.
During the hearing, a number of the claimants attended the High Court, including Prince Harry, to the surprise of the British media.
Witness statements from all seven claimants were also released. The duke’s statement said he is bringing the claim “because I love my country” and remains “deeply concerned” by the “unchecked power, influence and criminality” of the publisher.
“If the most influential newspaper company can successfully evade justice, then in my opinion the whole country is doomed,” he said.
On 10 November 2023, Mr Justice Nicklin gave the go-ahead for the case to go to trial, saying ANL had “not been able to deliver a ‘knockout blow’ to the claims of any of these claimants”.
What’s happened since?
Earlier this year, lawyers for the claimants sought to amend their case to add a swathe of new allegations for the trial.
They argued that they should be allowed to rely on evidence that they said showed the Mail was involved in targeting Kate, the Princess of Wales.
However, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled this allegation was brought too late before trial.
In a further development in November, the High Court heard that a key witness in the case, private investigator Gavin Burrows, claimed his signature on a statement confirming alleged hacking had taken place, was forged.
Image: Lawyer David Sherborne is representing all the claimants
In the statement from 2021, Mr Burrows allegedly claimed to have hacked voicemails, tapped landlines, and accessed financial and medical information at the request of a journalist at the Mail On Sunday.
The statement was important, as five of the seven claimants involved in the case told the court they embarked on legal action against ANL based on evidence apparently obtained by Mr Burrows.
Mr Burrows previously retracted his statement in 2023, but the court heard he reiterated the denial to ANL’s lawyers in September this year.
It is now up to the claimant’s lawyer Mr Sherborne to decide if he still wants to call Mr Burrows as a witness for the trial.
Mr Justice Nicklin previously said if Mr Burrows gave evidence that was inconsistent with the evidence they had obtained, then he could apply to treat him as “hostile”.
Could the case end before going to trial?
In short, yes.
During pre-trial reviews, cases can either be settled or dismissed from court in both civil and criminal cases, meaning no trial will take place.
This happened in Harry’s case against News Group Newspapers (NGN), which publishes The Sun. The duke made similar accusations about NGN, which involved unlawful information gathering by journalists and private investigators.
Before an up-to 10-week trial began earlier this year, it was announced both sides had “reached an agreement” and that NGN had offered an apology to Harry and would pay “substantial damages”.
The settlement was reported to be worth more than £10m, mostly in legal fees.
Another of Harry’s legal cases, this time against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over accusations of historical phone hacking, did go to trial.
The trial saw Harry take to the witness box, making him the first senior royal to give evidence in a courtroom since the 19th century.
In December 2023, the Honourable Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that the duke’s phone had been hacked “to a modest extent” between 2003 and 2009, and 15 of 33 articles he complained about were the product of unlawful techniques.
A raft of tax rises is expected in the budget this lunchtime – with the chancellor acknowledging that voters are “angry at the unfairness in our economy”.
In a newly released video, Rachel Reeves said the public is “frustrated at the pace of change” – but vowed to “take the fair and necessary choices” to tackle the cost of living crisis.
And in a dig at the Conservatives – especially former prime minister Liz Truss – she pledged not to impose austerity, lose control of public spending, or engage in more reckless borrowing.
But given the chancellor had ruled out such a measure last year – because it would “hurt working people” and “take more money out of their payslips” – this will attract criticism from opposition parties.
The chancellor has backed away from raising income tax rates outright, a move that would have breached Labour’s manifesto, but she still needs to find the cash to pay for her public spending plans.
Image: Watch our special programme for Budget 2025 live on Sky News from 11am
Some measures already confirmed by the government include:
It is being reported that the chancellor will also put a cap on the tax-free allowance for salary sacrifice schemes, raise taxes on gambling firms, and bring in a pay-per-mile scheme for electric vehicles.
Setting the scene ahead of the budget at 12.30pm, Ms Reeves said she will “push ahead with the biggest drive for growth in a generation”, promising investment in infrastructure, housing, security, defence, education, and skills.
Although she has vowed not to “duck challenges” nor “accept that our past must define our future”, she admitted that “the damage done from austerity, a chaotic Brexit, and the pandemic were worse than we thought”.
What are the key timings for the budget?
11am – Sky News special programme starts.
About 11.15am – Chancellor Rachel Reeves leaves Downing Street and holds up her red box.
12pm – Sir Keir Starmer faces PMQs.
12.30pm – The chancellor delivers the budget.
About 1.30pm – Leader of the Opposition Kemi Badenoch delivers the budget response.
2.30pm – The independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) holds a news conference on the UK economy.
4.30pm – Sky News holds a Q&A on what the budget means for you.
7pm – The Politics Hub special programme on the budget.
The fiscal black hole is down to several factors – including a downgrade in the productivity growth forecast, U-turns on cuts to benefits and the winter fuel allowance, as well as “heightened global uncertainty”.
Nonetheless, the chancellor has promised more investment to cut NHS waiting lists, deal with “waste in the public sector”, and reduce the national debt.
“This budget is for you, the British people. So that together we can build a fairer, stronger, and more secure Britain,” she said.
Conservative shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride has said Ms Reeves is “trying to pull the wool over your eyes” – having promised last year that she would not need to raise taxes again.
Meanwhile, Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper has accused her and the prime minister of “yet more betrayals”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:08
What is the ‘milkshake tax’?
What could her key spending announcements be?
As well as filling the black hole in the public finances, these measures could allow the chancellor to spend money on a key demand of Labour MPs – partially or fully lifting the two-child benefits cap, which they say will have an immediate impact on reducing child poverty.
Benefits more broadly will be uprated in line with inflation, at a cost of £6bn, The Times reports.
In an attempt to help households with the cost of the living, the paper also reports that the chancellor will seek to cut energy bills by removing some green levies, which could see funding for some energy efficiency measures reduced.
Other measures The Times says she will announce include retaining the 5p cut in fuel duty, and extending the Electric Car Grant by an extra year, which gives consumers a £3,750 discount at purchase.
The government has already confirmed several key announcements, including:
Extra funding for the NHS will also be announced in a bid to slash waiting lists, including the expansion of the “Neighbourhood Health Service” across the country to bring together GP, nursing, dentistry and pharmacy services – as well as £300m of investment into upgrading technology in the health service.
And although the cost of this is borne by businesses, the chancellor will confirm a 4.1% rise to the national living wage – taking it to £12.71 an hour for eligible workers aged 21 and over.
For a full-time worker over the age of 21, that means a pay increase of £900 a year.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
11:05
What the budget will mean for you
Britons facing ‘cost of living permacrisis’
However, the Tories have hit out at the chancellor for the impending tax rises, with shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride saying in a statement: “Having already raised taxes by £40bn, Reeves said she had wiped the slate clean, she wouldn’t be coming back for more, and it was now on her. A year later and she is set to break that promise.”
He described her choices as “political weakness” – choosing “higher welfare and higher taxes”, and “hardworking families are being handed the bill”.
The Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper is also not impressed, and warned last night: “The economy is at a standstill. Despite years of promises from the Conservatives and now Labour to kickstart growth and clamp down on crushing household bills, the British people are facing a cost-of-living permacrisis and yet more betrayals from those in charge.”
She called on the government to negotiate a new customs union with the EU, which she argues would “grow our economy and bring in tens of billions for the Exchequer”.
Green Party leader Zack Polanski has demanded “bold policies and bold choices that make a real difference to ordinary people”.
The SNP is calling on the chancellor to “help families” rather than “hammer them with billions of pounds of cuts and damaging tax hikes that destroy jobs and hurt economic growth”.
A headline tax-raising measure expected in today’s budget is an extension of the freeze on income tax thresholds for another two years beyond 2028, which should raise about £8bn.
The amount people pay is dependent on how much they earn, with different tax bands kicking in at different income levels.
In the past, these thresholds have been increased in line with inflation. But more recently they have been frozen, leaving people paying more to the exchequer even if actual tax rates stay the same.
Sky News looks at what the thresholds are, the implications of freezing them, and how that causes “fiscal drag”.
Income tax thresholds
England, Northern Ireland and Wales all have the same income tax rates, set by the British government.
Scotland’s income tax bands are set by the Scottish government, so Westminster budget announcements on income tax do not affect workers in Scotland.
For England, Northern Ireland and Wales, there is a “personal allowance” of £12,570, under which no income tax is paid.
For those earning above £100,000, the personal allowance goes down by £1 for every £2 of income, and can go down to zero, so a person can end up paying income tax on all of their income.
Datawrapper
This content is provided by Datawrapper, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Datawrapper cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Datawrapper cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Datawrapper cookies for this session only.
Thresholds were previously increased annually by consumer price index (CPI) inflation – the estimate of the level of prices of goods and services bought by households.
But, because income tax thresholds have been frozen while wages continue to rise, more people are being brought into higher bands and having to pay more income tax.
A worker whose earnings just keep up with inflation is paying a larger proportion of their salary in tax due to the freeze.
This means more money for the government – a lot more.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
11:05
The budget vs your wallet: How the chancellor could raise billions
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates a continuing freeze in thresholds would raise about £42.9bn annually by the 2027/28 tax year.
And the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has projected that freezes to the basic and higher rates of income tax alone would raise £39bn a year by 2029-30.
That is roughly similar to the amount of revenue that would be raised by increasing all income tax rates by 3.5 percentage points.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:35
Sky News goes inside the room where the budget is decided
Fiscal drag
Freezing income tax thresholds without tax rates increasing has been branded a “stealth tax”, as the government collects more revenue without having to pass a law to raise tax rates.
It is also known as fiscal drag, as more people are pulled into paying tax, or into paying tax at a higher rate.
The OBR estimates the freeze will bring nearly four million more people into paying income tax, three million more people into the higher rate (40%) and 400,000 more into the additional rate (45%) by 2028-29.
The British Army has paused the use of its new Ajax armoured fighting vehicles after “around 30” soldiers suffered vibration and hearing problems following a training exercise at the weekend.
A Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesperson said on Tuesday the two-week pause comes after “a small number of soldiers reported symptoms of noise and vibration” in the exercise, which was “immediately stopped”.
The spokesperson said “around 30 personnel presented noise and vibration symptoms” after tests were carried out, but the “vast majority of these have now been medically cleared and are continuing on duty”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:42
Is the army’s new fighting vehicle any good?
A small number “continue to receive expert medical care”, they said.
“Out of an abundance of caution, the minister for defence readiness and industry [Luke Pollard] has asked the army to pause all use of Ajax for training and exercising for two weeks, while a safety investigation is carried out into the events this weekend.
“A small amount of testing of the vehicle will continue, in order to ensure that any issues can to identified and resolved.”
The MoD said the decision “underlines our absolute commitment to the safety of our personnel. As with any major equipment programme, we continue to test and refine the vehicle to ensure safety and performance”.
More on Ministry Of Defence
Related Topics:
“The safety of our personnel is our top priority,” the spokesperson said.
The Ajax, which costs nearly £10m and weighs more than 40 tonnes, is being billed by the ministry as a “next generation” fighting machine.
Image: The Ajax has a 40mm gun
As heavy as a Russian tank, the vehicle is equipped with cameras, protective armour and a 40mm gun, with bullets that can rip through concrete.
Soldiers were taken to hospital this summer after suffering hearing and other injuries because of loud noise and vibrations coming from the vehicles.
Earlier this month, the MoD confirmed that a “small number” of troops had reported noise and vibration concerns following trials on three variants of the tracked vehicle.
A spokesperson said an investigation was carried out and “no systemic issues were found”.
An internal review published in 2021 found that senior soldiers and MoD officials had known for up to two years that earlier faults with the Ajax vehicle had been putting troops at risk of harm.