“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
“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.
A teenage girl who was killed after getting out of a police car on the M5 in Somerset has been named.
Tamzin Hall, 17 and from Wellington, was hit by a vehicle that was travelling southbound between junction 24 for Bridgwater and junction 25 for Taunton shortly after 11pm on Monday.
She had exited a police vehicle that had stopped on the northbound side of the motorway while transporting her.
A mandatory referral was made to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, which is now carrying out its own investigation into what happened.
The police watchdog, the IOPC, has been asked to investigate.
In a statement, director David Ford, said: “This was a truly tragic incident and my thoughts are with Tamzin’s family and friends and everyone affected by the events of that evening.
“We are contacting her family to express our sympathies, explain our role, and set out how our investigation will progress. We will keep them fully updated as our investigation continues.”
Paramedics attended the motorway within minutes of the girl being hit but she was pronounced dead at the scene.
The motorway was closed in both directions while investigations took place. It was fully reopened shortly after 11am on Tuesday, Nationals Highways said.
A survivors group advocating for women allegedly assaulted by Mohamed al Fayed has said it is “grateful another abuser has been unmasked”, after allegations his brother Salah also participated in the abuse.
Justice for Harrods Survivors says it has “credible evidence” suggesting the sexual abuse allegedly perpetrated at Harrods and the billionaire’s properties “was not limited to Mr al Fayed himself”.
The group’s statement comes after three women told BBC News they were sexually assaulted by al Fayed’s brother, Salah.
One woman said she was raped by Mohamed al Fayed while working at Harrods.
Helen, who has waived her right to anonymity, said she then took a job working for his brother as an escape. She alleges she was drugged and sexually assaulted while working at Salah’s home on Park Lane, London.
Two other women have told the BBC they were taken to Monaco and the South of France, where Salah sexually abused them.
The Justice for Harrod Survivors representatives said: “We are proud to support the survivors of Salah Fayed’s abuse and are committed to achieving justice for them, no matter what it takes.”
The group added it “looks forward to the others on whom we have credible evidence – whether abusers themselves or enablers facilitating that abuse – being exposed in due course”.
Salah was one of the three Fayed brothers who co-owned Harrods.
The business, which was sold to Qatar Holdings when Mohamed al Fayed retired in 2010, has said it “supports the bravery of these women in coming forward”.
A statement issued by the famous store on Thursday evening continued: “We encourage these survivors to come forward and make their claims to the Harrods scheme, where they can apply for compensation, as well as support from a counselling perspective and through an independent survivor advocate.
“We also hope that they are looking at every appropriate avenue to them in their pursuit of justice, whether that be Harrods, the police or the Fayed family and estate.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
13:55
Bianca Gascoigne speaks about Al Fayed abuse
The Justice for Harrods Survivors group previously said more than 400 people had contacted them regarding accusations about Mohamed al Fayed, who died last year.
One of those alleged to have been abused is Bianca Gascoigne, the daughter of former England player Paul.
Speaking to Sky News in October, Gascoigne said she was groomed and sexually assaulted by al Fayed when she worked at Harrods as a teenager.
Wes Streeting “crossed the line” by opposing assisted dying in public and the argument shouldn’t “come down to resources”, a Labour peer has said.
Speaking on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunctionpodcast, Baroness Harriet Harman criticised the health secretary for revealing how he is going to vote on the matter when it comes before parliament later this month.
MPs are being given a free vote, meaning they can side with their conscience and not party lines, so the government is supposed to be staying neutral.
But Mr Streeting has made clear he will vote against legalising assisted dying, citing concerns end-of-life care is not good enough for people to make an informed choice, and that some could feel pressured into the decision to save the NHS money.
Baroness Harman said Mr Streeting has “crossed the line in two ways”.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, 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 Spreaker 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 Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
“He should not have said how he was going to vote, because that breaches neutrality and sends a signal,” she said.
“And secondly… he’s said the problem is that it will cost money to bring in an assisted dying measure, and therefore he will have to cut other services.
Advertisement
“But paradoxically, he also said it would be a slippery slope because people will be forced to bring about their own death in order to save the NHS money. Well, it can’t be doing both things.
“It can’t be both costing the NHS money and saving the NHS money.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:09
Review into assisted dying costs
Baroness Harman said the argument “should not come down to resources” as it is a “huge moral issue” affecting “only a tiny number of people”.
She added that people should not mistake Mr Streeting for being “a kind of proxy for Keir Starmer”.
“The government is genuinely neutral and all of those backbenchers, they can vote whichever way they want,” she added.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has previously expressed support for assisted dying, but it is not clear how he intends to vote on the issue or if he will make his decision public ahead of time.
The cabinet has varying views on the topic, with the likes of Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood siding with Mr Streeting in her opposition but Energy Secretary Ed Miliband being for it.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is being championed by Labour backbencher Kim Leadbeater, who wants to give people with six months left to live the choice to end their lives.
Under her proposals, two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge must give their approval.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:30
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater discusses End of Life Bill
The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life.
MPs will debate and vote on the legislation on 29 November, in what will be the first Commons vote on assisted dying since 2015, when the proposal was defeated.