The Duke of Sussex has been criticised for trying to shoot at “trophy targets” as he has lost an application to bring new allegations against Rupert Murdoch in his High Court hacking claim against the publisher of The Sun.
Mr Justice Fancourt criticised the Duke’s lawyers for trying to “inculpate the man at the very top” by pinning knowledge on the media mogul personally.
He said the allegations made against Mr Murdoch added nothing to his case.
The judge criticised the Duke’s lawyers for trying to “shoot at ‘trophy’ targets”.
He warned: “This cannot become an end in itself: it only matters to the court so far as it is material and proportionate to the resolution of the individual causes of action. The trial is not an inquiry.”
Denied permission to include investigators
The Duke was also denied a request to extend his claim by including allegations that date back to 1994.
The Prince and more than 40 others are suing News Group Newspapers (NGN) and the News Of The World, over alleged unlawful information gathering and invasion of privacy. A trial has been scheduled for January 2025.
He was refused permission to include the names of some 150 private investigators, some of which had no specific claims made against them.
Barrister David Sherborne had sought to amend the claim against NGN to make specific allegations about the “destruction and concealment” of evidence by certain individuals.
His proposed updates included the naming of several journalists and senior executives, including Mr Murdoch.
The judge also refused permission for allegations to be newly made against NGN’s Management and Standards Committee and those relating to the targeting of politicians.
Allegations add nothing to claim
The judge added: “Tempting though it no doubt is for the claimants’ team to attempt to inculpate the man at the very top, doing so will add nothing to a finding that Ms Brooks and Mr James Murdoch or other senior executives knew and were involved, if that is proved to be the case.”
The judge said that the allegations made “directly made against Rupert Murdoch personally” added nothing to the Duke’s claim.
He said: “I cannot see what difference is made to the allegations of habitual and extensive unlawful information gathering (UIG), knowledge on the part of senior executives, and concealment and destruction, by trying to pin actual knowledge on him personally.
“There are already allegations pleaded against Rebekah Brooks and James Murdoch, who are his trusted lieutenants in relation to News Corporation and NGN and who are very senior executives in their own right.”
The judge criticised the Duke’s legal team for trying to bring forward too many amendments at too late a stage, in what he described as a “very expensive and time consuming exercise”.
He also criticised NGN for failing to concede enough of the lesser amendments.