Prince Harry seeks to appeal after losing case against UK tabloid

Prince Harry on Friday launched a legal challenge after losing a privacy case against the publisher of the British tabloid the Daily Mail. Prince Harry seeks to appeal after losing case against UK tabloidThe case is the third and final one brought by the Duke of Sussex in his acrimonious legal battle with British tabloids.

The High Court in August ordered Harry and six others, including pop legend Elton John, to make an initial payment of £9.5 million to Associated Newspapers Limited after finding against them a month earlier. Harry, the 42-year-old younger son of King Charles III, and the other claimants were seeking to appeal on grounds that the judgement and costs ruling were "legally and factually flawed", a statement sent to AFP by law firm Sheridans said The group had "today filed applications with the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal," the statement addded.

The claimants in the case who also incude John's husband David Furnish and actors Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost had accused the Mail of bugging their cars and homes, listening into calls and other privacy breaches. ANL had denied all the allegations.

The appeal bid comes after Harry, known fomally as the Duke of Sussex, and his wife Meghan, 45, moved back to the UK in August with their two young children Archie, seven, and Lilibet, five. The couple left Britain and quit royal duties in 2020 amid a bitter royal family feud.

After an emotional 11-week trial during which Harry gave in-person evidence judge Matthew Nicklin in July sided with the newspaper publisher, concluding the claimants failed to prove their allegations. After a further two-day hearing over costs, he made the initial costs decision, while again criticising the claimant's case as "speculative".

The court noted ANL estimated its total costs defending itself had reached about £34.5 million by July 9. However, the ruling noted the High Court had not determined how much of those costs the claimants must ultimately pay.

The matter is set to be determined at a separate hearing. Nicklin rejected requests by Harry and the others to pay on a standard basis, instead favouring arguments by ANL that its costs should be repaid on a stricter so-called indemnity basis.

"The Court concluded that the litigation had been pursued in a way that took it 'well outside the norm'," the summary of the ruling said, noting "the gravity of the allegations" among other factors. The court had previously been told there was a shortfall between ANL's total costs and the claimant's insurance cover of a combined £16.2 million.

In a joint statement after losing the case Harry and campaigner Doreen Lawrence called it "a complete and obvious whitewash". An ANL spokesperson called the decision "another overwhelming victory for the Mail and its journalism".