Prince Harry's potential $12.45 million gamble in a lawsuit against the publisher of Rupert Murdoch's tabloid The Sun has been laid bare by Hugh Grant as the English actor tapped out of his own case.
The Duke of Sussex and Grant together sued News Group Newspapers, publisher of The Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, on allegations of unlawful journalistic practices.
However, now the British actor, who starred in Love Actually and recently was an Oompa Loompa in Wonka, has settled out of court. On Wednesday, he posted a long thread on X, formerly Twitter, detailing how accepting a payout was his only option due to the potential threat of paying sky-high costs even if he wins.
The pair were aiming not just to get compensation but to force Murdoch-owned News Group Newspapers (NGN), publisher of the two tabloids, to acknowledge illegal activity took place at The Sun. NGN has denied the claims.
Harry raged against what he described as "false denials," "fake email chains" and corruption that he wanted to expose publicly.
However, by settling out of court, Grant has given up the quest to force public accountability. His reasons could make sobering reading for the prince.
Grant wrote on X: "News Group are claiming they are entirely innocent of the things I had accused The Sun of doing—phone hacking, unlawful information gathering, landline tapping, the burglary of my flat and office, the bugging of my car, the illegal blagging of medical records, lies, perjury and the destruction of evidence.
"As is common with entirely innocent people, they are offering me an enormous sum of money to keep this matter out of court.
"I don't want to accept this money or settle. I would love to see all the allegations that they deny tested in court.
"But the rules around civil litigation mean that if I proceed to trial and the court awards me damages that are even a penny less than the settlement offer, I would have to pay the legal costs of both sides.
"My lawyers tell me that that is exactly what would most likely happen here. Rupert Murdoch's lawyers are very expensive. So even if every allegation is proven in court, I would still be liable for something approaching £10 million in costs. I'm afraid I am shying at that fence."
That sum, around $12.45 million, is almost as much as the entire cost of Harry and Meghan Markle's house in Montecito which they bought in 2020 for over $14 million. Public records suggested they used a mortgage of $9.5 million and put up $5.2 million of their own money at the time.
Their fortunes will have changed significantly since that time following their multi-year Netflix deal and Harry's bestselling book Spare but $12.45 million is still a major sum.
Cutting that check would likely be torturous for even an exceptionally wealthy litigant like Harry.
And what makes matters worse for the prince is the risk that he may lose on a technicality even if his allegations are substantially true.
On paper, privacy claims like the ones he has brought have to be filed within six years and in relation to most of his claim Harry's case was brought substantially later.
Attorneys for Harry argue he had no idea he was a victim until far more recently—within the six-year limit—and should therefore have the right to sue.
It has long been known that the News of the World hacked phones, including Harry's, and broke the law—a number of its journalists went to prison for it.
But NGN has always maintained the illegal activity was confined to the News of the World and did not take place at The Sun.
That denial is a major part of what Harry is trying to overturn. However, he has already been told his phone-hacking claims were filed too late, so they have been stripped out of the case.
Other allegations relate to "blagging," the practice of posing as someone else in order to obtain information unlawfully. For example, Harry accused The Sun of obtaining his ex-girlfriend's flight records so they could ambush her at the airport.
The judge has said in a past ruling that he could not say one way or the other whether Harry's case was filed too late in relation to those claims without a trial, by which time Harry would be fully committed.
That means Harry could throw all that money away only to lose because he left it too late to bring his case. Newsweek approached his representatives for comment.
His feelings on the subject though are strong as he made clear in a past witness statement, seen by Newsweek: "My view is how can anybody possibly trust, be influenced by, or accept a media organisation, that enjoys the liberties of free press, when its senior executives and Board cover up the truth by making false denials (i.e. lying), concealing documents, creating fake email chains, and destroying evidence (including both emails and computer hardware) and then have the gall to try to 'strike out' people's legitimate claims on the basis that they should have known they had a claim much earlier.
"How on earth could these people have known the extent of their claims, when NGN has gone to such great lengths to conceal the truth and destroy evidence?
"When they have the powers that they have, and where even the police and the government of the day are scared to hold them accountable or seek justice against them, they can truly believe they are above the law.
"And if they're above the law, then it's the general public and the country that suffers. It's really that simple."
"Finding out about this level of cover up is what makes me want to see my NGN claim through to an end, so people can really understand what happened.
"The fact that it was not just the journalists who were carrying out the unlawful activity, but also those in power who were turning a blind eye to it so as to ensure that it would continue unabated, and who then tried to cover it up when the game was up, is appalling."
Jack Royston is Newsweek's chief royal correspondent based in London. You can find him on X, formerly Twitter, at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page.
Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate Middleton, Meghan Markle and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We'd love to hear from you.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
About the writer
Jack Royston is Newsweek's Chief Royal Correspondent based in London, U.K. He reports on the British royal family—including King Charles ... Read more
To read how Newsweek uses AI as a newsroom tool, Click here.
