The High Court in London heard opening arguments on Tuesday in the defamation case brought by Prince Harry against the publisher of the Daily Mail, Associated Newspapers, over an article that called him a 'professional liar'. The Duke of Sussex's lawyer, David Sherborne, told the court that the description was 'a plain and unambiguous allegation of dishonesty' that had caused 'serious harm' to his client's reputation.
Article at Center of Dispute
The contested article, published in June 2022, reported on a legal battle between Prince Harry and the Home Office over his security arrangements. It quoted a judge's remark that the prince had been 'less than frank' in his evidence, but the Mail's headline and lead paragraph characterized him as a 'professional liar'. Sherborne argued that the newspaper had 'deliberately sensationalized' the judge's comment to sell copies.
Defense Arguments
Andrew Caldecott, representing Associated Newspapers, countered that the phrase was a fair summary of the judge's criticism and that the article as a whole was not defamatory. He told the court that the prince had a 'thick skin' and that the public interest in the story justified the language used. The trial is expected to last several days, with both sides calling witnesses.
Broader Context
Prince Harry has a history of legal action against the British press, citing intrusive reporting and alleged phone hacking. This case is separate from his ongoing privacy claims against other tabloids. According to legal experts, the outcome could set a precedent for how far newspapers can go in characterizing public figures' testimony.
