Prince Harry surprisingly returned to London on Monday to attend the High Court’s first hearing in four days and argue a legal claim from himself and others against the Daily Mail and its publisher “for wiretapping and misuse of private information.” It is the first time she has returned to London since the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II.
The duke is among seven high-profile figures suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), owner of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday. Harry already won a libel case against the Daily Mail last year.
The other plaintiffs are actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost, singer Sir Elton John and her husband David Furnish, Baroness Doreen Lawrence and former Lib Dem MP Sir Simon Hughes.
In a joint statement released in October, the group said it had learned of “compelling and very distressing evidence that they had been victims of heinous criminal activities and serious privacy violations“.
Surprise visit
Without Meghan, in a black overcoat and in front of photographers and journalists who didn’t expect his presence, Harry got out of a van with his American bodyguards. It is not known where he is staying: if you still live in your house in Frogmore Cottage, where your father asked you to be evicted after publishing his book Spare or in Buckingham Palace, for security reasons.
The self-exiled prince in California after breaking with the royal family only informed his father, the king, that he was on his way. You won’t see it. He was informed that he was “very busy” at Buckingham Palace. The sovereign was neither in Windsor nor London on Monday as he prepared for his official trip to Germany.
Carlos III was supposed to be in France this Monday for his first state visit, which was canceled on Friday, due to demonstrations and the state of revolt in Paris and major French cities, at the request of President Emmanuel Macron.
On Wednesday, what will be his first state visit as a sovereign begins in Berlin, Germany, together with the queen consort.
Harry’s presence at the court hearing against the tabloid The Daily Mail, with which he the royal family maintains good ties to publicize their businessesit will be a strong distraction for the first visit of Carlos III and the queen consort Camilla to Berlin.
the royals they try not to overshadow each other’s activitiescoordinating them to always have their place in the tabloids and, if possible, in traditional newspapers.
Although relations with William, his brother, they are disastrous, you will not run the risk of meeting. The Prince and Princess of Wales and their children are not in London because the boys have school holidays, palace sources said.
Arriving at court in the morning with a small team of staff, the duke smiled at the press. He ran into a photographer as he was entering the building just before 10.30am London time who apologised.
In the living room
He was sitting in the courtroom with his lawyers, dressed in a dark blue suit and tie. As the hearing progressed, he leaned forward across the desk with his hands clasped, listening intently.
The court proceedings began with an offer by ANL’s lawyers to impose certain limitations on reporting the case, but the Daily Mail has so far not published their presence in court.
The Duke occasionally made notes in a small black notebook as ANL solicitor Catrin Evans KC presented legal arguments.
Actress Sadie Frost, who also filed a lawsuit against the publisher, sat two seats away from Prince Harry.
The Duke is among seven high-profile figures suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).
The editor of the Mail vehemently denied the allegations. He described them as “absurd slander” and a “pre-planned and orchestrated attempt to drag the headlines into the phone hacking scandal”.
The preliminary hearing scheduled for this week will allow Judge Nicklin determine if the case can continue.
the accusation
The judge will hear legal arguments on an Associated application alleging, inter alia, that the plaintiffs’ use of the information breaches a restraining order issued by Lord Justice Leveson.
All plaintiffs are represented by an attorney David Sherbornewho had access to the information, as a representative of the main participants in the investigation eleven years ago.
Associated should argue that no claim has been made to use this information and therefore any claims based on it should be removed.
ANL has also presented a request, which has not found opposition, to maintain the anonymity of the appointed journalists, until the judge decides whether or not to proceed with the complaints.
Full details of the complaint have yet to be released and will remain under seal until the issue is resolved. The appellants affirm this listening devices were placed in their homes and cars.
However, the plaintiffs allege that Associated, publisher of the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday and MailOnlinehired private detectives to install listening devices in their homes and cars, that people were being paid to listen to live phone calls and register them and that “bank accounts and other financial information were accessed by unlawful means and manipulation.”
They should also argue that police officers, with ties to private detectives, they were paid to obtain private information and that they impersonated other people to get medical information from hospitals, clinics and treatment centers private through deception.
It is also argued that bank accounts, credit histories and financial transactions have been accessed by illegal means.
ap
Source: Clarin
Mary Ortiz is a seasoned journalist with a passion for world events. As a writer for News Rebeat, she brings a fresh perspective to the latest global happenings and provides in-depth coverage that offers a deeper understanding of the world around us.