A legal battle launched by Prince Harry, Baroness Lawrence and others against the Mail is costing a “manifestly excessive” amount of money, two judges ruled yesterday.
They said the estimated costs of the case, at £38.8 million, were “outside the range of reasonable”.
Senior Master Cook, who manages court case budgets, said he and the trial judge, Mr Justice Nicklin, “had little difficulty in concluding that such sums were manifestly excessive”.
They said in a ruling that the allegations were “really quite simple” compared to other cases, such as medical negligence claims, which are often brought before the High Court.
Slashing both sides’ budgets, the judges said: “We have concluded that the sums requested by both parties are clearly outside the range of reasonable and proportionate costs.”
The Duke of Sussex, Baroness Lawrence, mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, and five others launched legal action in 2022 against Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Daily Mail and The Mail On Sunday.
The Duke of Sussex launched legal action in 2022 against Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Daily Mail and The Mail On Sunday.

Baroness Doreen Lawrence, mother of Stephen Lawrence, who was stabbed to death in London in 1993, arrives at 10 Downing Street, London, on September 9, 2024.

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, waves as he arrives at the Royal Courts of Justice, Britain’s High Court, in central London on March 28, 2023.
At a recent hearing it emerged Baroness Lawrence launched her legal battle after Harry sent her a text message, which the court heard the Labor peer had “lost and possibly deleted”.
The plaintiffs, who also include Sir Elton John and actress Sadie Frost, say they launched their legal action after a private investigator informed them of alleged “confessions” that he had hacked into phones, tapped landlines and planted bugs in cars.
All allegations are firmly denied by Associated Newspapers, which has described them as “outrageous” and “simply absurd”, as well as false.
The private investigator in question also signed a statement saying that Associated Newspapers had not ordered him to carry out any illegal activities.
A nine-week trial will begin in January 2026 to test controversial allegations that articles published by the newspapers were the product of “illegal information collection.”
Judge Cook said the issues at stake were simple and that plaintiffs would either prove or fail to prove that an item was the product of illegal activity.
He added: “The fact that these plaintiffs are well known and the litigation is high profile does not affect the issues that need to be resolved.”
The ruling, which came two days after Prince Harry settled his legal battle with the publisher of The Sun, noted that lawyers for the duke, Baroness Lawrence and the others now had “considerable experience in this type of litigation and were not starting from scratch”, which was one of the reasons why the proposed costs were considered “disproportionate”.

At a recent hearing it emerged that Baroness Lawrence launched her legal battle after Harry sent her a text message.

A nine-week trial to test the disputed allegations will begin in January 2026. Pictured: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, walks in front of the Rolls Building at the High Court in London in 2023.
Judge Nicklin previously warned the plaintiffs that their allegations of wiretapping, theft and eavesdropping had to be supported by “admissible evidence” or withdrawn.
The Sun settled with Harry after “intense” negotiations to settle out of court.
In the Mail’s case, yesterday’s ruling states that while the seven claimants have budgeted £216,000 for out-of-court negotiations known as “alternative dispute resolution”, Associated Newspapers “did not believe” this was possible and the newspaper did not budget money for agreement negotiations.