![](\"https:\/\/i.dailymail.co.uk\/1s\/2023\/12\/15\/12\/79001991-12868243-image-a-1_1702644120028.jpg\")
<\/p>\nPrince Harry has won \u00a3140,000 from the Mirror\u2019s publisher after the High Court ruled he was the victim of phone hacking.<\/p>\n
The Duke of Sussex\u2019s case was \u2018proved in part\u2019, said Mr Justice Fancourt. Journalists at the Sunday Mirror, the People and the Daily Mirror had unlawfully obtained Harry\u2019s private information for news stories, he found.<\/p>\n
He ruled the duke’s phone was probably hacked \u2018to a modest extent\u2019 on occasions between 2003 and 2009.<\/p>\n
The landmark case concluded at the High Court after a seven-week trial over the summer at which Harry became the first senior royal in over 100 years to testify.<\/p>\n
In a statement from the duke read outside court by his lawyer David Sherborne today, Harry said it was \u2018a great day for truth, as well as accountability\u2019.<\/p>\n
He said: \u2018This case is not just about hacking – it is about a systemic practice of unlawful and appalling behaviour, followed by cover-ups and destruction of evidence, the shocking scale of which can only be revealed through these proceedings.\u2019<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, departs the Rolls Building of the High Court in London in June. Today he\u00a0won \u00a3140,000 from the Mirror\u2019s publisher after the High Court ruled he was the victim of phone hacking<\/p>\n
Mr Justice Fancourt found that 15 out of 33 articles about Harry had come from hacking.<\/p>\n
The judge said: \u2018I consider that his phone was only hacked to a modest extent, and that this was probably carefully controlled by certain people at each newspaper. However, it did happen on occasions from about the end of 2003 to April 2009.\u2019<\/p>\n
But he said there had been \u2018a tendency\u2019 for Harry to assume that everything published had been the product of voicemail hacking. Of the remaining 18 articles, he said Harry\u2019s claims \u2018did not stand up to careful analysis\u2019.<\/p>\n
The duke had been seeking at least \u00a3440,000 in damages. Mr Justice Fancourt awarded him \u00a3140,600 and said Harry had suffered<\/p>\n
distress \u2018a result of the unlawful activity directed at him and those close to him\u2019. Part of the compensation was \u2018aggravated\u2019 damages because the judge ruled two directors on the Mirror\u2019s board had known about the hacking but \u2018turned a blind eye\u2019 rather than stop it.<\/p>\n
![](\"https:\/\/i.dailymail.co.uk\/1s\/2023\/12\/15\/13\/79001983-12868243-David_Sherbourne_reads_a_written_statement_on_behalf_of_his_clie-a-1_1702645418751.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
David Sherborne reads a written statement on behalf of his client Prince Harry following the ruling in his favour in a lawsuit against the Mirror Group. He said: ‘A great day for truth, as well as accountability’<\/p>\n
Harry, 39, sued Mirror Group Newspapers for damages, claiming journalists at its titles were linked to methods including phone hacking, so-called \u2018blagging\u2019 or gaining information by deception, and use of private investigators for unlawful activities.<\/p>\n
The newspaper argued stories had not come from hacking but from fellow members of the Royal Family and even his own interviews.<\/p>\n
Harry flew in from America to give evidence in court to become the first senior British royal to do so since 1890.<\/p>\n
In his ruling, the judge said that, in general, there had been \u2018extensive\u2019 use of phone hacking at the three Mirror newspapers from 2006 to 2011, \u2018even during some extent during the Leveson Inquiry\u2019.<\/p>\n
Following the ruling, Mirror Group Newspapers said: \u2018We welcome today’s judgment that gives the business the necessary clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago. Where historical wrongdoing took place, we apologise unreservedly, have taken full responsibility and paid appropriate compensation.\u2019<\/p>\n