Prince Harry pursued a legal case against Rupert Murdoch’s British tabloids for years, saying he wanted to hold them accountable for invasions of privacy.
Frank Augstein/AP/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Frank Augstein/AP/AP
LONDON — Prince Harry and a senior British lawmaker have agreed to settle with Rupert Murdoch’s British publishing arm, ending a years-long struggle to hold its tabloids accountable for illegal privacy invasions and an alleged coverup of crimes.
Murdoch’s British tabloid division offered a “full and unreserved” apology to Harry for what it admitted were unlawful intrusions on his privacy from 1996 to 2011, for the strain it put on his family, and for its actions toward his mother, the late Princess Diana.
Murdoch’s company also offered an apology to former Member of Parliament Tom Watson, a senior Labour Party leader who is now a member of the House of Lords, for surveillance on him from 2009 to 2011, when he was investigating the Murdoch tabloids in Parliament. The company said it was paying “substantial damages.”
The settlement was announced Wednesday morning at what was to have been the opening arguments of the trial, slated to last at least six weeks.
Their lawyers told the court this month that the litigants were not seeking financial advantage from the case. Harry asserted the same last month in an interview with the New York Times.
It was intended by Harry and Watson to give their legal team the ability to present publicly newly secured evidence to make the case that top executives destroyed evidence and lied to police during the height of a phone hacking scandal here more than a decade ago.
Those at the core of those allegations include Will Lewis, now CEO and publisher of The Washington Post. He is not a defendant in the case, and has denied all wrongdoing. Due to the settlement, claims against Lewis and the other executives have not been tested in court. News UK, the British newspaper arm of Murdoch’s vast media company, has vigorously denied any destruction of evidence or deception of police.
Harry and Watson have rejected earlier settlement overtures, instead saying they needed acknowledgements of wrongdoing to end their claims. In the U.K., damages awarded in court are typically far smaller than in the U.S.
And British law exerts pressure on plaintiffs to reach a settlement. They can be forced to pay the defendant’s legal costs if they reject a settlement offer that exceeds the amount of the judgment awarded at trial.
