By Sheila Mckenzie-
A High Court judge questioned ‘factual inconsistencies’ in Prince Harry’s latest bombshell witness claims yesterday in his latest battle with the British Press.
High Court judge, Mr Justice Fancourt has raised concerns over “inconsistencies” in the Duke of Sussex’s phone hacking claim against the publisher of The Sun.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The judge also questioned why Mr Sherborne had suddenly introduced this new evidence without making an application to submit it to the court.
He said the claimant’s legal team should have applied to the defendants to give them a chance to make submissions before updating the details of their case.
The claimant’s legal team was subsequently forced to make an application to introduce Prince Harry’s claims of a ‘secret deal’ into their evidence which was challenged by NGN.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Prince Harry has alleged that a “secret agreement” between News Group Newspapers (NGN) and Buckingham Palace had prevented him from bringing his claim any earlier- a claim vehemently denied by Palace representatives.
Harry, who is no fan of the British press, said the Royal Family agreed to not pursue NGN until after the group’s legal battle with other hacking claimants ended.
The royals’ claims would then be quietly ‘admitted or settled with an apology’. NGN denies this deal existed. The duke, who watched on by video link, said he was first told of the agreement in 2012 and only brought his claim in 2019 after growing frustrated with NGN ‘filibustering’ on the deal.
However, Justice Fancourt questioned why he had failed to mention the alleged pact in his original claim. The judge also highlighted “inconsistencies” in the Duke’s case over when he first became aware he was a victim of hacking.
The questions were raised during a three-day preliminary hearing at which Prince Harry’s lawyers are challenging an attempt by NGN to “strike out” the claim on the grounds that it was brought too late.
The Duke of Sussex submitted a 31-page witness statement where he alleged it was in fact the existence of a ‘secret agreement’ with NGN approved by the Queen that prevented him from bringing claims.
The Duke of Sussex has also alleged that phone calls made by the King and Queen Consort were intercepted by the publisher of the Sun newspaper during the 1990s, according to court documents.
Prince Harry’s barrister said that the prince’s private information would also have been intercepted as a result.
Prince Harry is suing the publisher, News Group Newspapers (NGN), over alleged unlawful information-gathering.
NGN is seeking to have his claim thrown out, along with a similar claim by actor Hugh Grant, arguing they have been brought too late.
The case is among three major cases that Prince Harry has made against tabloid newspapers, alleging unlawful information-gathering. The other cases concern the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail groups.
Harry, who is no fan of the British press, said the Royal Family agreed to not pursue NGN until after the group’s legal battle with other hacking claimants ended.
The allegations are serious, and reveal Harry’s convictions about serious unethical conduct in the press during the period he alleges.
It is unclear how Harry’s representatives propose addressing the difficult question of inconsistencies, given the importance of being truthful under oath.
If his case is approved by the judge, it will proceed to the next stage of the duke’s legal representatives facing the task of providing evidence to support their claim. It is assumed Prince Harry and his team have already considered that before they brought their case to court, but the world would want to see if the already deeply upset duke of sussex have the needed evidence to prove their case, if they can get past the first hurdle of getting the case officially accepted for a full blown hearing.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar