Prince Harry to learn fate in High Court case against Daily Mail

Prince Harry is set to discover the result of his High Court case against the Daily Mail’s publisher as he returns to England.

Harry will be in the country when the judgment is published on Tuesday afternoon UK time (Tuesday night AEST), after an 11-week trial earlier in 2026 in his claim against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over alleged unlawful information gathering.

A group of household names including Elton John and his husband David Furnish alleged acts including voicemail interception, landline tapping and obtaining information by deception - also known as “blagging”, carried out by private investigators, freelance journalists and ANL staff.

ANL strongly denies the claims and defended the case, saying it has established “a complete defence to all parts of the claims on the merits” and that the cases have been brought too late.

The judge is set to give his written ruling on the case via email at 2pm local time (11pm AEST).

The decision comes as Harry’s accommodation arrangements for his UK visit descended into chaos, ahead of five days of appearances in London and Birmingham, including marking the one-year countdown to the 2027 Invictus Games.

The Duke of Sussex will not stay at Buckingham Palace during his return, with his spokesman saying on Monday it was disappointing the offer from the King had been “withdrawn at the last moment”, with the looming judgment given as the reason.

It is understood the duke initially turned down the offer for himself and his family, who are no longer accompanying him to London, on Saturday, before making a U-turn later in the day and asking to stay himself.

The appropriate hospitality and staffing provision was said to be no longer available, with Buckingham Palace also believing the longstanding legal case had complicated the matter, and could compromise the King’s constitutional position.

Dozens of people gave evidence during the high-profile trial in London, including Harry, the rest of the group of household names of Liz Hurley, Sadie Frost and Simon Hughes, as well as many current or former ANL journalists and executives.

During around two hours of cross-examination in January, Harry said he could not complain about some of the 14 articles in his case at the time because of the institution he was in.

He also said in his written evidence that knowingly false information was added to stories to “put me off the scent”, to conceal unlawful methods, including voicemail interception.

As part of its defence, ANL said Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists provide a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”, including friends and “leaky” social circles, press officers and spokespersons, as well as previous reporting, freelance journalists and stories from other newspapers and news agencies.

The trial also heard arguments over whether the cases were brought in time as the law states that legal action related to unlawful information-gathering must be launched within six years of someone discovering they could have a claim.