A British court ruled on July 7, 2026, that Prince Harry and six other famous people did not have enough evidence to prove the Daily Mail publisher had illegally hacked their phones. The judge decided in favor of the Daily Mail The Guardian.

The seven people suing were Prince Harry, actress Elizabeth Hurley, musician Elton John, Baroness Doreen Lawrence, David Furnish, Simon Hughes and Sadie Frost. Their lawyer, David Sherborne, represents clients in many of these types of media cases. The trial lasted 46 days over four months The Guardian.

The judge noted that Prince Harry's testimony sometimes went beyond just stating facts. He sometimes argued about legal points instead. When a case depends on putting pieces of evidence together rather than having documents that prove things outright, how believable the judge finds a witness matters a lot The Guardian.

The seven claimants now have to pay over £50 million in legal fees combined. The bills for just Harry and Elton John were around $50 million Reuters AP E! News.

This case took about a year to prepare before the trial even started. There were several court hearings in 2025 to organize what evidence each side would share and which witnesses would testify judiciary.uk.

The verdict came out while Prince Harry was in London for an event supporting the Invictus Games, his charity for injured military veterans. Buckingham Palace had refused to let him stay at the Palace during this visit, saying they didn't have enough notice to arrange it properly The Guardian.

Prince Harry has called his fights with British newspapers his "life's work." He has already won a partial victory against a different newspaper company, Mirror Group, where the court agreed he was wronged on some stories. This case against the Daily Mail was supposed to be his last big lawsuit against the tabloids AP.

In British courts, when you lose a case, you have to pay part of the other side's legal bills. That system can make people think twice before starting expensive lawsuits. Whether Prince Harry will try to appeal this decision—ask a higher court to look at it again—is not yet clear.