Prince Harry’s legal action against the publisher of The Sun newspaper, over allegations of unlawful information gathering, is due to begin today.

The Duke of Sussex is one of two claimants, alongside former Labour deputy leader Tom Watson, who are continuing their claims against News Group Newspapers (NGN).

NGN has always denied unlawful activity at The Sun.

The claim is separate to the phone hacking case Harry brought against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), which was heard by the High Court in 2023.

The court ruled that phone hacking was carried out by MGN journalists from 1996 to 2011, and was “widespread and habitual” from 1998.

The newspaper publisher agreed last year to pay “a substantial additional sum” in damages to the duke, as well as his legal costs – on top of the £140,600 already awarded to him by judges.

So how is this trial different, and what can we expect to happen in court?

Who is involved?

Prince Harry and Lord Watson are the only two claimants going forward with legal action against the publisher.

The court was told back in November that 39 cases have been settled since a hearing last July.

This includes actor Hugh Grant, actress Sienna Miller, ex-footballer Paul Gascoigne, comic Catherine Tate and Spice Girl Melanie Chisholm.

Harry told a New York Times summit at the end of last year that one of the main reasons he was pursuing the case was because the others “had to settle”.

Other names you may hear in court are David Sherborne, the lawyer representing Harry, and Mr Justice Fancourt, the judge presiding over the case.

Who are News Group Newspapers?

NGN publishes The Sun newspaper and used to publish the now-defunct News Of The World, which closed in 2011.

It is a subsidiary company of News UK, which is owned by News Corp, the corporation owned by Rupert Murdoch.

News UK also owns papers including The Times and The Sunday Times, but they are published by a different subsidiary company.

In 2011, NGN issued an unreserved apology for widespread phone hacking carried out by journalists at the News of the World which Mr Murdoch shut down.

The publisher has since paid out hundreds of millions of pounds to victims of phone hacking and other unlawful information gathering by the News of the World, and settled claims brought by more than 1,300 people.

But it has always denied any unlawful activity at The Sun, and the upcoming trial will be the first to examine specific allegations against the paper, which was previously edited by Rebekah Brooks, who is now chief of News UK.

What are the allegations?

Harry alleges that he was unlawfully targeted by journalists and private investigators working for NGN.

The court ruling will therefore decide if any of the NGN articles were the product of unlawful information gathering, such as information being tricked or “blagged” out of phone companies by private investigators.

The decision will stop short of ruling over phone hacking allegations, after Harry was denied permission by the court to bring those allegations to trial.

The duke had already lodged civil claims against NGN at the High Court, but in March last year, he sought to amend his case to add new allegations, including that The Sun ordered private investigators to target his then girlfriend – and now wife Meghan – in 2016.

The High Court refused this, ruling that the duke could not add new allegations relating to the years 1994, 1995 and 2016 to his case.

He was also denied permission to pursue allegations against Rupert Murdoch himself, and his argument that there had been a “secret deal” between the publisher and senior royals, was also rejected.

In November last year, the two sides returned to court in London to ask a judge to rule on preliminary issues before the trial began.

Lord Watson was also at the hearing.

Mr Justice Fancourt ruled Harry could use further emails between executives of the publisher of The Sun and members of the royal household that were sent between 2013 and 2019, in his legal claim.

What were the allegations against MGN?

Harry’s court case against the Daily Mirror publisher Mirror Group Newspapers began in May 2023.

He was part of a group litigation that also saw soap stars Nikki Sanderson, Michael Le Vell (Turner), and Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse, as claimants.

Together, they accused MGN journalists or private investigators of phone hacking on an “industrial scale” and obtaining private details by deception, and said that senior editors and executives knew and approved of such behaviour.

Phone hacking involves intercepting private voicemail messages on another person’s device. This could be done remotely, and all it required was knowing someone’s mobile number.

In his ruling, Mr Justice Fancourt concluded that phone hacking and unlawful information-gathering techniques such as “blagging” took place at the Mirror Group from 1996 to 2011.

He said it was “widespread and habitual” from 1998, and that its journalists continued to hack phones “to some extent” during the Levison Inquiry into media standards in 2011 and 2012.

The judge concluded Harry’s phone had been hacked “to a modest extent” between 2003 and 2009, and 15 of 33 news articles he complained about were the product of unlawful techniques.

What will happen in court?

The case against The Sun will be heard in the Rolls Building of the High Court. It is due to last for eight to 10 weeks.

It will consider specific claims brought by both Harry and Lord Watson, as well as “generic” allegations of wrongdoing by NGN staff, including editors and other senior figures.

Harry could take to the stand himself, to be cross-examined for four days.

Former prime minister Gordon Brown is also expected to appear in court as a witness.

What has NGN said?

NGN has always denied unlawful activity at The Sun.

A spokesperson for the publisher said ahead of the start of the trial: “His [Harry’s] claim will be fully defended, including on the grounds that it is brought out of time.”

The spokesperson added that Lord Watson had never been a target of hacking, and the allegation that emails had been unlawfully destroyed was “wrong, unsustainable, and is strongly denied”.

An inquiry into the Southport stabbings has been announced by the government.

It comes after Axel Rudakubana, 18, admitted murdering Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, Bebe King, six, and Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, in the attack in Southport, Merseyside, in July last year.

In a statement, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said that now there has been a guilty plea, “the families and the people of Southport need answers about what happened leading up to this attack”.

Politics latest: PM says ‘grave questions to answer’ over Southport

It has now emerged that Rudakubana was referred to the government anti-extremism scheme – known as Prevent – three times before the murders due to a fixation with violence.

In her statement, Ms Cooper said these three referrals happened in the 17 months between December 2019 and April 2021, when Rudakubana was 13 and 14 years old.

He was also in contact with the police, the courts, the youth justice system, social services and mental health services.

“Yet between them, those agencies failed to identify the terrible risk and danger to others that he posed,” Ms Cooper said.

“We also need more independent answers on both Prevent and all the other agencies that came into contact with this extremely violent teenager as well as answers on how he came to be so dangerous.”

Rudakubana is set to be sentenced on Thursday – with the judge saying a life sentence is “inevitable”.

Sir Keir Starmer said earlier today: “The news that the vile and sick Southport killer will be convicted is welcome.

“It is also a moment of trauma for the nation and there are grave questions to answer as to how the state failed in its ultimate duty to protect these young girls.

“Britain will rightly demand answers. And we will leave no stone unturned in that pursuit.”

After the attacks in July 2024, there were calls for more information about what was known by authorities to be released and violent riots took place across the country.

Read more:
Mugshot of Axel Rudakubana released
People of Southport are trying to make sense of horror

Ms Cooper said the government was not able to release more information sooner about Rudakubana because the Crown Prosecution Service wanted to “avoid jeopardising the legal proceedings” – including any potential trials – “in line with the normal rules of the British justice systems”.

However, the government launched an “urgent” review into Rudakubana’s contact with Prevent last summer – and details will be published this week.

Ms Cooper said this “terrible case” comes against a “backdrop” of increasing numbers of teenagers being referred to Prevent, investigated by anti-terror police being referred to other agencies “amid concerns around serious violence and extremism”.

“We need to face up to why this has been happening and what needs to change,” she said.

Speaking earlier today, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said: “As we learn more details of Axel Rudakubana’s horrific crimes, my thoughts are first and foremost with the victims’ families.

“We will need a complete account of who in government knew what and when. The public deserves the truth.

“This case is still in court and there are, properly, limits on what can be said at this stage.

“But once it concludes on Thursday with sentencing, there are many important questions the authorities will need to answer about the handling of this case and the flow of information.”

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage accused the government of a “cover-up”, and said the “vacuum of information” led to the riots.

He called on Ms Cooper to make an apology in the Commons.

Southport attacker Axel Rudakubana was referred to the government’s anti-extremism Prevent scheme three times before the murders.

Rudakubana, 18, pleaded guilty to the murders of Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, Bebe King, six, and Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, at Liverpool Crown Court on what was due to be the first day of his trial on Monday.

He also admitted 10 counts of attempted murder and possession of a kitchen knife over the mass stabbing as well as charges of producing ricin and possessing an al Qaeda training manual found in searches of his home in Banks, Lancashire, in the following days.

Eight other children, aged between seven and 13, along with yoga instructor Leanne Lucas and businessman John Hayes were injured in the attack at the Hart Space in the Merseyside town on 29 July.

It has now emerged he was referred to Prevent three times amid concerns over his fixation with violence.

Anyone referred to the scheme is assessed and if deemed a terrorism risk referred to another programme, Channel, although many referrals don’t result in any further police action.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said there were “grave questions to answer as to how the state failed in its ultimate duty to protect these young girls”.

Just a week before the attack, Rudakubana, then 17, booked a taxi to take him to Range High School in Formby, but his father stopped him from leaving, it is understood.

The teenager, who has been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, was expelled from the school in around 2019 over claims he was carrying a knife after telling Childline he was being racially bullied and brought the knife to protect himself.

It is understood that, after his exclusion, he returned to the school to target a former bully or someone he had a grievance with and assaulted someone with a hockey stick.

Rudakubana then attended two specialist schools, where teachers were concerned about his behaviour.

Not guilty pleas had previously been entered on Rudakubana’s behalf to all 16 charges after he stayed silent at previous hearings.

He refused to stand or confirm his identity as he changed his pleas to guilty, while none of his victims’ family members were in court, as prosecutors were expected to open their case on Tuesday.

Wearing a grey tracksuit and surgical face mask, he showed no emotion as he was taken down to the cells, surrounded by four dock officers and an intermediary.

The judge, Mr Justice Goose said he would sentence the teenager on Thursday, telling him: “You will understand it is inevitable the sentence to be imposed upon you will mean a life sentence.”

But he is not expected to be handed a whole life order, a sentence meaning he would never be released, because of his age at the time.

Judges can only impose the term on criminals who were aged 21 and over at the time of the offence, but it can be considered for those aged 18 to 20 in exceptional circumstances.

The Southport attack, which has not been declared terror-related, sparked a wave of violence across the country as riots broke out after posts spread online that claimed the suspect was a 17-year-old asylum seeker, who had come to the country by boat.

After the guilty plea today, Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor Ursula Doyle said: “This was an unspeakable attack, one that has left an enduring mark on our community and the nation for its savagery and its senselessness.

“At the start of the school holidays, a day which should’ve been one of carefree innocence, of children enjoying a dance workshop and making friendship bracelets, became a scene of the darkest horror as Axel Rudakubana carried out his meticulously planned rampage.

“It is clear that this was a young man with a sickening and sustained interest in death and violence. He has shown no sign of remorse.”

Read more from Sky News:
Police release mugshot of Rudakubana
How the people of Southport are trying to make sense of horror

Rudakubana was born in Cardiff to Rwandan parents, where neighbours of the family described a “lovely couple” with a hardworking father and stay-at-home mother to “two boisterous boys”.

In 2013, they moved to the village of Banks, just a few miles outside of Southport, where his father, Alphonse Rudakubana, trained with local martial arts clubs.

A profile of Mr Rudakubana, printed in local newspaper the Southport Visiter in 2015, said he was originally from Rwanda, a country that suffered a deadly genocide in the early 1990s, and moved to the UK in 2002.

When he was 11 years old, Rudakubana appeared dressed as Doctor Who in a television advert for BBC Children In Need, after being recruited through a casting agency, it is understood.

The now-deleted clip shows him leaving the Tardis wearing a trench coat and tie to look like the show’s former star David Tennant and offering advice on how best to raise money.

At his first appearance at Liverpool Crown Court, Deanna Heer KC, prosecuting, said it was understood Rudakubana had been unwilling to leave the house and communicate with his family for a period of time before the attack.

“He was seen by the psychiatrists at the police station but refused to engage with them,” she said.

The court was told he had no obvious evidence of mental health disorder which required hospital treatment and his mother, father and older brother were said to have been co-operating with police and had provided witness statements.