A group of high-profile figures, including Prince Harry, have been ordered to pay an initial £9.5m to the publisher in legal costs after their failed High Court case.
The Duke of Sussex, along with six others including Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, had unsuccessfully sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
ANL strongly denied the claims, which were heard at an 11-week trial in London earlier this year, with judge Mr Justice Nicklin dismissing all the cases in a judgment on 7 July. The conduct of the claimants’ case was “unreasonable to a high degree”, he ruled.
English is lit! Great Expectations rewritten by AI in Gen Z slang
‘I call myself Pip. It’s not a name with much rizz’
One of the great classics, written by Charles Dickens, has been modernised – but it’s not aimed at children studying the text in class.
- The Dickens classic has been fed into the AI model Claude Opus 4 to produce “Bare Expectations”.
- The shortened adaption uses the slang of teenagers today, using words like “ick” and “drip”.
- It was made by Tesco Mobile, in partnership with author Chloe Combi, to help parents better understand their children and keep them safe online.
- It was also read as an audio book by Allan Mustafa, from Kurupt FM.
Classic for the modern age
You’d think the best MC in the galaxy would know all the latest slang, and I do. If any kid tells you otherwise, they’re lying. Any words I don’t know are just not cool enough for me to care about!
Allan Mustafa, MC Grindah from Kurupt FM, told Retail Times.
A closer look at the detail
But 77 per cent of parents worry about their online safety. One in four parents felt unprepared when giving their child their first phone. More than half are confused by their child’s language at least once a week.
But campaigners say the best way to keep children safe online is by not giving them a smartphone in the first place.
Are Channel crossing numbers down?
The French authorities have become more “effective” at stopping migrants crossing in dangerous small boats across the Channel, the UK Government has said.
What do the figures tell us?
The figures compared to last year
5%
The increase in the number of small boats intercepted in the last three months compared with last year.
The Home Office said, citing French figures, that since April, 61 per cent of small boats have been intercepted.
The deal agreed by the UK and France in April.
This includes £161m in performance-based targets.
Channel crisis
In the past few weeks, three boats were stopped – two of which were at sea.
Numbers falling
Some 15,897 migrants have crossed the Channel, 43 per cent down on the same period last year.
Last month, a record 165 migrants reached the UK in a single boat.
“People smugglers should be in no doubt, we’re taking down their operations, seizing their equipment and breaking their business model for good,” said Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood.
3 min read
British rapper Yung Filly to face retrial on rape charges in Australia
The rapper and YouTuber who appeared on Celebrity Bake Off will face a retrial after a jury could not reach a verdict during trial.
Yung Filly denied all charges
The Colombian-born rapper, whose real name is Andrés Felipe Valencia Barrientos, was charged with raping and assaulting a 20-year-old fan after his show in Perth 2024. He denied all 10 charges and a jury last month found him not guilty of three charges of rape.
5 min read
3 min read
He was accused of raping a fan
Barrientos was accused of having consensual sex with her until he turned violent and didn’t stop when asked. His lawyer said the evidence was full of “inconsistencies, embellishments and outright lies”.
4 min read
A closer look at the detail
- Last month, a jury found him not guilty on three counts of rape.
- He was cleared of one assault charge and another of strangulation.
- But he was found guilty of two counts of assault.
- Jurors were unable to make a decision on three counts of sexual penetration without consent.
Could El Niño make next year even hotter?
The naturally occurring phenomenon known as El Niño, which can drive up global temperatures and is brewing in the Pacific, could be the strongest in living memory, the Met Office has warned.
What is El Niño?
It is a climate phenomenon which occurs in the Pacific Ocean every two to seven years.
Normally, trade winds blow east to west across the equator – during and El Niño period, these weaken or reverse.
This pushes up global temperatures as warmth is taken from the ocean into the atmosphere.
El Niño’s impact already been seen
It has already started to affect weather systems in other parts of the world, with below-average monsoons in India and suppressed hurricane activity in the Atlantic Ocean. In the UK, El Niño is usually felt later in winter.
A particularly strong El Niño coupled with global warming has left scientists worried that 2027 could be even warmer.
El Niño is strongest in living memory
We should be clear that this is an unprecedented event. I have never seen an El Niño signal this intense in our forecasts.
Professor Adam Scaife, head of
long-range forecasting, the Met Office
Risk of most intense El Niño in 1,000 years
- El Niño is declared when the sea temperature in the tropical eastern Pacific rises 0.5°C above the long-term average.
- But currently it’s over 2°C and could reach 3°C later this year.
- Some have suggested it could go above 4°C – meaning it would be the strongest El Nino in the last 500-1,000 years.
Next year could be hottest ever
The precise effect El Niño has on global weather can be unpredictable. But Met Office climate scientist Dr Nick Dunstone told the BBC average global temperatures could rise next year. This would make 2027 the hottest year on record, after 2024.
4 min read
Why children’s eyesight is getting worse – and what parents can do about it
More and more children are becoming
short-sighted, but scientists have discovered it can be reversed through behaviour change.
Rates of short-sightedness are rising across the world – and we now know why
- In the UK, short-sightedness is rising at a rate of 0.7 per cent per year.
- This means that by 2050 about four in 10 British children will be short-sighted and need glasses.
- But contrary to old myths, we are not (exactly) becoming more short-sighted because of too much screentime.
Short-sightedness is linked to the outdoors
Large research studies have found a lack of time outside causes short-sightedness. This could be because children are simply not using their long-distance vision as their eyeballs develop.
The other theory scientists are considering is that our eyes need the brighter light that we are exposed to outdoors to develop properly.
How to combat
short-sightedness
- Randomised trials suggest more outdoor time reduced the development of new short-sightedness.
- For children who were already
short-sighted, using eyedrops with atropine every night until age 16 helped reduce the degree of
short-sightedness. Specialised glasses can also help.
The High Court has now ordered the claimants to make an “interim payment” of £9.5m by 4pm next Friday, 28 August.
Harry and his fellow claimants may eventually have to pay legal costs running into tens of millions of pounds, some of it out of pocket. The full legal bill will be decided at a later date.
The cases returned to the High Court for a two-day hearing over costs, where the court was told ANL’s total costs were more than £34m.
Financial consequences of ruling ‘significant,’ experts say
Experts told The i Paper that the significance of this judgement is less about the £9.5m interim payment – which is covered by insurance – and more about the ruling that costs must be assessed on an indemnity basis.
This means that, as the losing party, Harry and the other claimants must pay towards ANL’s costs without the publisher needing to show these were reasonable and proportionate.
Indemnity costs are justified where conduct is out of the norm – which applies in this case, as the judge ruled the conduct of the claim was “unreasonable to a high degree”.
“Such a finding is reserved for cases that fall outside the norm,” explained Iain Wilson, managing partner at Brett Wilson law firm. “Here, the judge left no doubt this was one, heavily criticising the claimants’ conduct. He was scathing about how the case was run, specifically the bringing of serious allegations without an adequate evidential basis.”
Regarding the “significant” consequences of Friday’s ruling, Wilson continued: “The can now seek costs well above the court-approved budget and the £16m insurance cap. While it is unlikely the will recover its full £34.5m claim, a figure the judge dubbed ‘exceptionally high’ and ‘unprecedented’, any award exceeding £16m must be paid by the claimants personally.”
The final figure will be determined by a specialist costs judge at a later hearing.
Michael Forrester, partner at Brandsmiths law firm, added: “The cost basis is crucial because, on the standard basis, ANL need to show costs are reasonable and proportionate, with any doubt resolved in the claimant’s favour.
“On the indemnity basis, doubts are resolved in ANL’s favour, and proportionality is much less relevant. This can have a huge effect on the overall amount of costs paid.”
Tom Snelling, partner at Signature Litigation, said the judgement “reaffirmed that irrespective of how big a case is or how famous the claimants are, serious allegations, especially allegations of dishonesty, fraud, bad faith or commercially unacceptable conduct, must be advanced and maintained with particular care.”
Colin Campbell, consultant at law firm Kain Knight and former costs judge at the Royal Courts of Justice, said that while the indemnity costs order marked “a significant win” for ANL, it was “far from game, set and match.”
He continued: “The Judge was scathing about their projected £34.5m costs bill… that criticism could prove highly significant when the publisher ultimately seeks to recover its costs.”
Claims brought by Harry lacked ‘evidential foundation’
In his written ruling on Friday afternoon, Mr Justice Nicklin said the claims brought by Harry and others were “speculative and substantially inferential” and “lacked a proper evidential foundation.”
ANL said the ruling “is a devastating critique of an attempt to destroy a newspaper and the reputations of its journalists, editors and executives”.
The indemnity costs order came despite the judge expressly finding that none of the claimants were dishonest in their evidence, Campbell pointed out.
It follows the revelation on Wednesday that Harry and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, are set to move back to the UK with their children. The couple left for California more than six years ago amid the ‘Megxit‘ crisis but will now return later this month to live in a non-royal residence outside London.
ANL, which also publishes The Mail on Sunday, had asked for more than £9.9m as an interim payment ahead of future hearings to decide its legal costs in depth.
Lawyers for the group of well-known names, also including David Furnish, Sadie Frost, Elizabeth Hurley and Sir Simon Hughes, argued that the interim payment should be just over £7.9m.
Conduct of claimants’ case ‘unreasonable to high degree’
Mr Justice Nicklin said in his 44-page ruling that he was granting costs on the stricter indemnity basis for several reasons, including “the public presentation of allegations of serious criminality and impropriety which were not ultimately established”.
“In my judgment, that conduct was unreasonable to a high degree,” Mr Justice Nicklin added, later describing the claims as “litigation conceived and pleaded on an unjustifiably wide canvas”.
The claimants’ legal representative Nicholas Bacon KC said in written submissions that the cost of covering ANL’s legal costs could be “very significant” and may not be covered by insurance.
What will Meghan and Harry do in the UK?
Olivia Bennett, senior digital PR director at SEO and digital PR agency Go Up, said that if Meghan can establish herself in Britain as a successful businesswoman rather than simply as a former member of the Royal Family, she’ll have a stronger appeal to potential commercial partners – especially if she can build a significant UK following alongside her US audience.
“I think the bigger opportunity now is building things they actually own. For Meghan, that’s particularly interesting with [lifestyle brand] As Ever,” Bennett said.
“If she can turn that recognition into genuine consumers for As Ever, rather than just headlines about Meghan, the earning potential changes significantly.”
It’s another story for Harry, who Bennett said has a different commercial model.
“I’d expect his opportunities to remain focused on speaking, publishing, documentaries, philanthropy, and his work with veterans and on online safety. Being back in Britain could give those projects more relevance with UK audiences and institutions,” she said.
How much money could the Sussexes make?
While the couple have previously demonstrated they can command multi-million-dollar partnerships, Bennett said those headline deals are “not necessarily the model forever”.
“The difference between having millions of people interested in you and building a business worth tens or potentially hundreds of millions is whether people actually keep buying from you,” she added.
Chloe Franses, founder of HelloFranses, a talent and influencer agency that manages and selects talent for brand campaigns, said Meghan and Harry will have to deal with the fact that the budgets on offer in the UK market are much lower than in the US, and that they will face more scrutiny of their financial endeavours.
Franses added: “However, if they are smart, there will be opportunities outside the spectacle of public luxury and high-society spaces that can pay handsomely.”
The i Paper is part of Harmsworth Media, a publishing division owned by ANL’s parent company DMGT – and has complete editorial independence.