Prince Harry suffered a legal setback yesterday when a judge intervened to prevent some of his witnesses from giving “comments” (rather than relevant evidence) in his trial against the editor of The Sun.
The newspaper has urged the court to stop the Duke of Sussex from turning the upcoming court case into a “public inquiry” into the press.
And yesterday, Judge Fancourt ordered Harry’s lawyers to suppress a series of witness statements, including those from former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, former Commons Speaker John Bercow and singer Charlotte’s mother. Church, Maria.
He said some of what they had to say was “merely commentary or argument.”
Under court rules, witnesses can only give evidence of facts directly relevant to a case.
A blockbuster trial expected to last eight weeks between Prince Harry, along with former Labor vice-president Lord Tom Watson, and News Group Newspapers, is less than two weeks away from starting at the High Court.
The couple is suing for alleged illegal data collection and invasion of privacy.
A number of high-profile witnesses are set to testify on his behalf.
Prince Harry (pictured) is suing News Group Newspapers for alleged illegal data collection and invasion of privacy.
The Duke of Sussex (pictured March 2023) will return to Britain in the New Year to give evidence at the eight-week trial.
But the judge said in a written ruling that the content of many of his witness statements “shows a lack of adequate understanding” of the court’s rules “or indifference” toward them.
He added: “It seems to me that some of the witnesses… wanted to express their strong opinions about the way they were treated by the (newspaper group), or make comments.”
He said Harry’s lawyers should have excluded such elements but “did not.”
Judge Fancourt ordered the statements of ten witnesses to be curtailed.
In addition to those of Messrs. Brown and Bercow, the statements of former Liberal Democrat ministers Sir Vince Cable and Chris Huhne must also be cut.
The judge said Harry’s legal team had already agreed that some of what witnesses said “will not be reliable” and other parts were “clearly not evidence” that could be presented at trial “and/or are simply comments or arguments.” .
As for two other potential witnesses, including Charlotte Church’s mother, the judge said “none, or virtually none” of their evidence was “relevant to the issues the court has to determine, and/or is simply a comment or argument”.
In his ruling, the judge awarded the newspaper half of its costs related to the argument over witness statements, saying it had been partly successful but also “overly optimistic” in other respects in trying to reduce the evidence.
Lord Watson (pictured April 2019) and Harry are the only two left with the case against The Sun editor.
Harry and his only remaining co-plaintiff, Tom Watson (pictured), the former deputy Labor leader, allege that journalists from The Sun and the defunct News of the World illegally obtained their private information.
Prince Harry is scheduled to fly to the United Kingdom to face up to four days on the witness stand next month, being questioned by the newspaper group’s lawyer.
It will be the duke’s second appearance in the courtroom, after he gave evidence in 2023 before the same judge who sued Mirror Group Newspapers alleging phone hacking.
After winning that case, Harry declared himself a “dragon slayer” and vowed to continue his crusade against the press.
In the new trial, the duke will be questioned about his claims that News Group Newspapers publications used illegal techniques to obtain information about him.
He alleges violations of his privacy in at least 30 articles written about him, including the day he discovered he had been accepted to Eton in 1998.
Some 39 other claimants, including Hugh Grant, who had joined Harry in the current leg of the managed class action, have settled out of court, with only the duke and Lord Watson continuing to pursue the case.
At a pre-trial hearing last month, Anthony Hudson KC, a lawyer for the newspaper group, accused Prince Harry’s side of “an attempt to turn the January trial into some form of public inquiry.”
He referred to recent comments made by the Duke of Sussex at an event in New York about refusing to solve the case and “see it through to the end”, saying: “It shows what’s really going on here… what This is clearly almost by definition, a public investigation.
David Sherborne, representing the duke and Lord Watson, responded by telling the judge: “To say this is over the top (it is a public inquiry etc.) is not helpful to your Honour.”
News Group Newspapers denies any wrongdoing and the case will begin on January 20.