Duke of Sussex v MGN Ltd [2023]
Share
Duke of Sussex and Others v MGN Ltd [2023] EWHC 3217 (Ch) revolves around the legal dispute involving Prince Harry, Nikki Sanderson, Michael Turner, and Fiona Wightman against MGN Limited (Mirror Group), the focus is on the alleged misuse of private information. The claimants contend that Mirror Group engaged in activities such as phone hacking and the use of private investigators to unlawfully obtain private information, which was subsequently published in newspaper articles. Notably, the claims are centred around the underlying unlawful information gathering, as claims related to the publication of articles were deemed time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980.
The trial serves as a pivotal examination within the broader Mirror Newspapers Hacking Litigation, addressing fundamental issues relevant to numerous claims. The selection of these test cases provides an opportunity to establish legal precedents applicable to other claims within the litigation.
The judgment delves into several key findings, including the extent of unlawful activities by Mirror Group beyond the period 1999-2006. It identifies private investigators involved in wrongdoing and assesses the degree of their culpability. Additionally, the awareness of Mirror Group directors and in-house lawyers regarding illegal activities and potential concealment is thoroughly investigated. The court also addresses limitation defences for certain claimants and clarifies the recoverability of damages for distress resulting from article publication.
Specifically, the court found that unlawful activities occurred from 1995 onwards, with phone hacking becoming widespread from 1998. Unlawful activities continued from 2006 to 2011, with a reduction in private investigator involvement during those later years. Among the 51 alleged private investigators, some were substantially involved in unlawful information gathering.
Regarding individual claims, the Duke of Sussex, Prince Harry, had partial proof of voicemail interception and unlawful information gathering. He was awarded damages for proven articles and invoices, including distress and aggravated damages, totalling £140,600. Michael Turner's case, with limited proof of voicemail interception and unlawful information gathering during his 2011 prosecution, resulted in damages, including a sum for aggravated damages, totalling £31,650. Claims by Nikki Sanderson and Fiona Wightman were dismissed due to limitation grounds.
The trial serves as a pivotal examination within the broader Mirror Newspapers Hacking Litigation, addressing fundamental issues relevant to numerous claims. The selection of these test cases provides an opportunity to establish legal precedents applicable to other claims within the litigation.
The judgment delves into several key findings, including the extent of unlawful activities by Mirror Group beyond the period 1999-2006. It identifies private investigators involved in wrongdoing and assesses the degree of their culpability. Additionally, the awareness of Mirror Group directors and in-house lawyers regarding illegal activities and potential concealment is thoroughly investigated. The court also addresses limitation defences for certain claimants and clarifies the recoverability of damages for distress resulting from article publication.
Specifically, the court found that unlawful activities occurred from 1995 onwards, with phone hacking becoming widespread from 1998. Unlawful activities continued from 2006 to 2011, with a reduction in private investigator involvement during those later years. Among the 51 alleged private investigators, some were substantially involved in unlawful information gathering.
Regarding individual claims, the Duke of Sussex, Prince Harry, had partial proof of voicemail interception and unlawful information gathering. He was awarded damages for proven articles and invoices, including distress and aggravated damages, totalling £140,600. Michael Turner's case, with limited proof of voicemail interception and unlawful information gathering during his 2011 prosecution, resulted in damages, including a sum for aggravated damages, totalling £31,650. Claims by Nikki Sanderson and Fiona Wightman were dismissed due to limitation grounds.
