A last-minute deal to resolve Prince Harry’s blockbuster court case against the publisher of The Sun plunged into chaos today, blamed on the time difference with California.
On a day of high drama, the Duke of Sussex was said to be “very close” to reaching an out-of-court settlement with the newspaper group.
However, Harry was not at the High Court for the opening of his high-stakes privacy case against News Group Newspapers (NGN), instead remaining at his home in California.
The court heard there had been “problems” getting “instructions” from the duke due to the time difference with California, where it was midnight.
And when Harry’s lawyers and those of the publisher asked the judge for more time – citing the time zone as “a factor” – a visibly irritated Judge Fancourt ordered them to continue with the trial anyway.
The judge said they had already had plenty of time and he was “not satisfied that this had anything to do with the calendar in California.”
There were dramatic scenes when he refused to allow any further delays, and the two opposing groups of lawyers united against him. They jointly appealed his decision, but he rejected it, saying: “The trial begins today.”
They then said they were going to appeal to the Court of Appeals, which has the power to overturn the judge’s ruling. Judge Fancourt, visibly angry, adjourned the case and left the courtroom.
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.

David Sherborne, lawyer for Britain’s Prince Harry, walks in front of the High Court Rolls Building on January 21, 2025.

Former deputy leader of the Labor Party, Tom Watson, leaves the Rolls Building at the High Court on January 21, 2025.
Harry was due to spend up to four days in the witness box being questioned about his allegations that NGN journalists illegally accessed his private information, which the news group denies.
Harry was the last of two claimants (the other being his Labor peer Lord (Tom) Watson) who had refused to settle with the publisher, after Hugh Grant accepted “a huge sum” last year. A total of 39 plaintiffs in the case settled out of court.
The duke, who has described himself as a “dragon slayer” in his crusade against the press, recently vowed he would not settle his case against NGN and pledged to “see it through to the end”.
But that seemed to change dramatically this morning. The trial was due to start at 10.30am, but Harry’s lawyer, David Sherborne, asked the court for a short delay.
It was reported outside court that there had been a last-minute settlement offer, with David Folkenflik, Rupert Murdoch’s biographer, tweeting that there had been “a massive offer from the Murdoch camp”.
The judge ultimately delayed the case all morning while the two sides collaborated in behind-the-scenes discussions.
However, when the hearing resumed shortly after lunch, Anthony Hudson, the newspaper’s KC, said there had been problems because of the time difference with California.
He told the court there had been “very intense negotiations in recent days and the reality is that we are very close.” But asking for two more hours, he added: “There is a problem with time, receiving instructions due to the time difference.”

Attorney Clare Montgomery leaves the High Court on January 21, 2025

Lawyers David Sherborne (left) and Ben Hamer (centre), representing Prince Harry, arrive at the Royal Courts of Justice on January 21.
He urged the judge not to start the trial, saying that “a very large sum will be paid if the trial begins this afternoon,” which is believed to be a reference to attorneys’ fees.
Starting the trial would have a “very, very substantial” impact on the terms of the agreement, he said. Sherborne, for Harry, confirmed that the eight-hour time difference with California was “a factor” but claimed it was not “the reason” for the situation.
Judge Fancourt said the two sides “have had sufficient time” to reach an agreement and ordered that the case, which was filed in 2019, must finally get underway.
When the Sun’s lawyer asked for a private conversation with the judge, he responded: “I’m not going to start having secret hearings about what’s going on.”
If Harry goes ahead with the case, he would face a large legal bill even if he wins, having rejected previous offers to settle out of court. Hugh Grant said he had reached a deal to avoid paying £10 million in legal costs.
Harry stayed on the case, telling a New York audience before Christmas: “There’s a system in place that if you’re offered more money as a settlement than you would ever get in court… then you’re obligated to have to resolve. Even if we win, I am still responsible for the legal costs of both parties.’
Harry said other plaintiffs had settled their cases, but promised: “One of the main reasons for doing this is accountability, because I’m the last person who can really do this.”
Witnesses giving evidence at the trial included Hugh Grant, actress Sienna Miller, former Prime Minister Gordon Brown and former Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow.

Attorney Clare Montgomery walks in front of the Rolls Building at the Superior Court on January 21.
It would have been the duke’s second appearance in court, after he gave evidence in 2023 before the same judge when he sued Mirror Group Newspapers alleging phone hacking.
In the retrial, the duke alleged 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.
39 other plaintiffs, including Hugh Grant, who had joined Harry in this leg of the class action, had settled out of court, with only the duke and Lord Watson still pursuing the case.
In the early stages of his case, Judge Fancourt dismissed Harry’s phone hacking allegations last year because the duke had waited too long before beginning that part of his legal case.
Harry had protested that a “secret agreement” by Buckingham Palace had prevented him from bringing his case earlier, but the judge ruled that such an agreement was “implausible” and rejected Harry’s bid to use it as a reason for his late claim.
Then, three months ago, his claims that The Sun had planted “spying” and “tracking” devices were also dismissed. Judge Fancourt said Harry had not provided “any details” to support these claims against the newspaper.
The duke brought the suit based on other types of illegal information gathering he alleges. He would have been the main witness in his case, and another, unidentified person, was also prepared to give evidence in support of his case, the court was previously informed.
The newspaper had some 65 witnesses lined up, including the infamous ‘fake sheikh’ Mazher Mahmood of the News of the World, the court was told.
At a pre-trial hearing last month (DEC), Anthony Hudson, the newspaper group’s KC, 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 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 it’s all about.” clearly is, almost by definition, a public action”. consultation.’
Mr Sherborne said this was not true.