Prince Harry's judge steps down amid court case: 'It is not a decision I have taken lightly'

The High Court ruled in the Duke of Sussex's favour in December 2023

Senior Evening Writer

19 hours agoJul 17, 2025, 2:36 PM GMT+1

A judge in charge of determining the legal costs of the Duke of Sussex's case against the Daily Mirror has recused himself from the process.

Senior Costs Judge Jason Rowley confirmed on Thursday that he was stepping away from the hearing, which was held to determine how much of Prince Harry's legal costs would be covered by Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) following the royal's victory against them in court back in December 2023.

Harry's case against MGM

The case was brought against MGM after the Prince sued the publisher for damages, claiming journalists at its titles – the Daily and Sunday Mirror and Sunday People – were linked to methods including phone hacking, blagging or gaining information by deception, and use of private investigators for unlawful activities.

The allegations spanned a period from as early as 1991 until at least 2011, the court heard. The high-profile trial spanned seven weeks and concluded in June 2023. Harry flew over from the US to spend eight hours of questioning in the witness box, over two days.

Challenge against the Home Office over UK security arrangements

In 2024, a High Court judge dismissed Harry's claim against the Home Office over security arrangements for himself and his family when they are in the UK.

The Duke challenged a February 2020 decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec), which falls under the remit of the department, after being told he would no longer be given the "same degree" of personal protective security when visiting.

Harry's lawyers said he was "singled out" and treated "less favourably" in the decision, arguing a failure to carry out a risk analysis and fully consider the impact of a "successful attack" on him meant the approach to his protection was “unlawful and unfair".

The Government argued Ravec was entitled to conclude the Duke's protection should be "bespoke" and considered on a "case-by-case" basis.

Retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane ruled that Ravec's approach was not irrational nor procedurally unfair, claiming Harry's lawyers had taken "an inappropriate, formalist interpretation of the Ravec process".

Harry was given permission to challenge Sir Peter's ruling in June last year, but this after a two-day hearing in April 2025, his appeal was dismissed in May 2025.

Unlawful information-gathering allegations against Associated Newspapers

Harry is one of seven high-profile people, including Sir Elton John and Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon, bringing legal action against the publisher of the Daily Mail over allegations it carried out or commissioned unlawful information gathering.

The firmly denied allegations against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) include the hiring of private investigators to place listening devices inside cars; the "blagging" of private records; and the accessing and recording of private phone conversations.

At a preliminary hearing, the publisher asked a judge to rule in its favour without a trial – arguing the legal challenges against it were brought "far too late".

The Duke made a surprise appearance at the Royal Courts of Justice in London for the proceedings in March 2023, where his lawyers argued that those bringing legal action were "thrown off the scent" and not aware of being targeted, having believed "categorical denials" from ANL over any involvement in unlawful activity.

Mr Justice Nicklin ruled in November 2023 that the publisher had failed to deliver a "knockout blow" to the early-stage legal challenges, allowing them to continue.

The full trial could be held in early 2026.

Settlement with News Group Newspapers

Harry alleged he was targeted by journalists and private investigators working for News Group Newspapers (NGN), which publishes The Sun and published the now-defunct News Of The World.

Shortly before an up-to-10-week trial was due to begin earlier this year, the Duke and NGN reached an agreement including a "full and unequivocal apology" and "substantial" damages, announced on 22 January.

NGN apologised to Harry for intrusion between 1996 and 2011, including "incidents of unlawful activities" by private investigators working for The Sun.

The publisher also apologised to the Duke for phone hacking, surveillance and misuse of private information by journalists and private investigators at the News of the World, which closed in 2011.

"We acknowledge and apologise for the distress caused to the duke, and the damage inflicted on relationships, friendships and family, and have agreed to pay him substantial damages," the NGN statement said.

The publisher also apologised for the impact of the "serious intrusion" into the private life of Harry's late mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.

An NGN spokesperson previously said its apology to Harry covered "incidents of unlawful activities carried out by private investigators working for The Sun, not by journalists, during the period 1996-2011".

They added: "There are strong controls and processes in place at all our titles today to ensure this cannot happen now. There was no voicemail interception on The Sun."

Lord Tom Watson, former Labour deputy leader, who was also taking legal action against the publisher, settled his claim as well.

Reporting by PA.

Prince Harry in a grey suit against a black background — Harry took to the witness box during the trial

In December of that year, Harry was awarded £140,600 in damages after the court found 15 articles about Harry were the product of unlawful information gathering.

David Sherborne reading a statement outside the High Court — The High Court ruled in Harry's favour in 2023

In February 2024, Harry's lawyer, David Sherborne, told the High Court that MGN would pay "substantial" additional damages and "all the costs of the duke's claim", including an interim payment towards the costs of £400,000.

Second legal battle

Harry also currently has a case against Associated Newspapers Limited, the group that owns the Daily Mail.

The Duke is part of a group including Elizabeth Hurley and Elton John who have accused the publisher of conducting or commissioning unlawful activities such as hiring private investigators to tap phones, and "blagging" private records.

Prince Harry leaving court — The Duke still has an ongoing case

In a ruling for the case last week, a High Court judge said that the Duke's legal team needed to hand over documents that relate to alleged payments for evidence in the case.

LISTEN: How the royals hosted Macron in style

In his judgment, Mr Justice Fancourt said: "I am satisfied that documents held by the claimants that can support a case that a witness has been paid or offered other inducement for their evidence, whether directly or indirectly, should be disclosed.

Prince Harry looking serious outside high court — Prince Harry suffered a court setback

"That is because there is a real prospect that Associated will be able to rely upon this evidence to attack the credibility of such witnesses. Ultimately, the issue of whether the payment or inducement does affect the credibility of any witness is a matter to be resolved at trial."

WATCH: Prince Harry makes surprise appearance at the Royal Courts of Justice

Sign up to HELLO! Daily for all the latest and best royal coverage

By entering your details, you are agreeing to HELLO! Magazine User Data Protection Policy. You can unsubscribe at any time. For more information please click here.