In a surprising turn of events, Prince Harry‘s allegations that The Sun planted tracking devices to monitor him have been dismissed by a judge in the High Court.
Mr. Justice Fancourt criticized the Duke of Sussex for failing to provide any concrete evidence to support his claims, raising questions about the validity of the accusations.
The ongoing legal battle involves Prince Harry and around 40 other individuals, all alleging that their private information was unlawfully obtained by the tabloid.
The court proceedings are set to unfold in January, but a preliminary ruling last Friday limited what could be included in the claims.
In a previous step, Prince Harry had already removed from consideration a claim regarding allegations that his ex-girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, had her car bugged.
This raised eyebrows, as the public was left wondering about the validity of the remaining claims.
Justice Fancourt noted that the particulars accompanying Prince Harry’s updated claims were disappointingly vague, describing them as “generalized” without any specifics related to the supposed surveillance methods.
He pointed out that no evidence was provided to support allegations of bugging or the installation of tracking devices.
In his written ruling, Mr. Justice Fancourt stated, “No particulars are provided about bugging, and a previous specific allegation in relation to Chelsy Davy’s car has been withdrawn.” This rejection of Prince Harry’s claims paints a troubling picture for his ongoing legal strategy.
The judge also prohibited the addition of vague terms like “listening and tracking devices” to the case, emphasizing again that specifics were non-existent.
This echoes previous decisions made by the court, where allegations of phone hacking were dismissed due to delays in filing the claims.
At the heart of this legal drama is Prince Harry’s assertion that a secret agreement with Buckingham Palace hampered his ability to act sooner.
However, the judge dismissed this argument as implausible, adding a further layer of challenge to the Duke’s legal claims.
Having launched this case in 2019, Prince Harry will still be allowed to pursue other claims regarding different forms of illegal information gathering as the trial approaches.
But the setbacks regarding his surveillance claims certainly do not bode well.
The case has been described by the judge as a protracted battle akin to a confrontation between two well-armed factions, squandering court resources.
He stated that this individual claim absorbs an inappropriate amount of time and detracts from the court’s mission to handle cases with fairness and efficiency.
Justice Fancourt granted some leeway for Harry’s legal team to make adjustments to their strategy while simultaneously upholding several objections from The Sun.
The judge noted that it was unreasonable to expect Harry to provide further details when the allegations claim that the newspaper has concealed such information.
The impending trial in January carries a sense of urgency, as the judge emphasized that a resolution must be reached, whether through trial or settlement.
It is clear that the court is pushing for a timely conclusion to this lengthy legal saga.
Despite his recent setbacks, Prince Harry’s pursuit of justice against media invasions is not entirely fruitless.
He did find some success in December 2023, winning a significant amount from another publisher over phone hacking claims.
This never-ending quarrel with the British press seems to have deeply affected both Harry and Meghan Markle, leading them to seek a quieter life across the pond.
However, the couple’s quest for happiness hasn’t been entirely free from difficulties.
Harry has voiced concerns about the toll that media scrutiny has taken on their lives, insisting that the abuse and harassment directed at Meghan have been particularly troubling.
He has highlighted how public discourse often veers into the realms of racism and sexism, impacting their mental health.
As the tensions between the Duke and the media continue, the upcoming trial will likely bring further attention to the complexities of privacy rights and the media’s responsibility in an age where celebrity and privacy collide.
The nation watches closely as the saga unfolds.
Read more
