Prince Harry’s legal bill has been making headlines yet again, this time not because of a new claim, but because of one that’s just been lost. Following the High Court’s dismissal of the privacy case brought against Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), publisher of the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, reports have put the combined legal costs facing Prince Harry and his fellow claimants at tens of millions of pounds.

For a story dominated by royal names, it’s easy to miss that the real headline, from a legal perspective, is a straightforward one: costs follow the event.

What Was the Case About?

The claim was brought by a group of six claimants, including the Duke of Sussex, Sir Elton John and David Furnish, Sadie Frost, Elizabeth Hurley and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, against ANL. The allegations included phone hacking, bugging of homes and vehicles, unlawful use of private investigators, and blagging of confidential information over a period of many years.

Following an 11-week trial running from January to March 2026, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed every claim. A key witness who had previously alleged unlawful conduct later withdrew that evidence, and the court found there was insufficient evidence to establish that the articles in question resulted from unlawful information gathering.

Why Could Prince Harry’s Legal Bill Be So High?

Under the general rule in CPR 44.2, the unsuccessful party is ordinarily ordered to pay a significant proportion of the successful party’s costs. Losing doesn’t just mean losing the argument; it typically means picking up the winner’s legal bill as well as your own.

That principle exists to protect the party who successfully defends a claim from being left substantially out of pocket simply because someone else chose to bring proceedings. Here, because ANL successfully defended the case in full, it’s expected to seek recovery of its costs from the claimants.

The scale of the figures being reported reflects the scale of the litigation itself: six claimants, extensive disclosure spanning many years of alleged conduct, numerous witnesses, and an 11-week trial. Litigation on this scale generates costs on both sides that can run into the tens of millions before a single order is even made.

Interestingly, earlier in proceedings the court had already intervened on costs, capping what the claimants and ANL could each budget for the trial after ruling that their initial proposals, which totalled well over £30 million combined, were manifestly excessive. Even with that intervention, the final combined bill being reported dwarfs the sums originally budgeted, illustrating how quickly costs in complex, multi-party litigation can escalate.

Losing Doesn’t Mean Paying Everything Claimed

An important point often lost in the coverage: an order for costs is not the same as a bill being automatically payable in full. There are two distinct stages.

First, the court decides who should pay. Second, if the amount can’t be agreed between the parties, those costs are assessed, either by summary assessment or, more likely given the scale here, by detailed assessment. That process examines whether the costs claimed were reasonably incurred, reasonable in amount, and proportionate to the litigation, and it frequently results in the final figure being reduced from what was originally claimed.

Given the scale of this case, any detailed assessment of ANL’s costs could become a substantial exercise in its own right, examining solicitors’ hourly rates, counsel’s fees, disclosure costs, expert fees and trial preparation across an 11-week trial.

Not the First Time Costs Have Followed Prince Harry

This isn’t the first costs order Prince Harry has faced in his long-running disputes with the British press. In an earlier, separate libel claim against the Mail on Sunday over an article concerning his security arrangements, a High Court judge ordered him to pay costs of around £48,000 after an unsuccessful interim application, a much smaller sum, but the same underlying principle at work.

That earlier order illustrates scale. A single failed interim application produced a five-figure costs order; a full trial across 11 weeks, involving six claimants and years of disclosure, has produced reported figures many hundreds of times larger. The principle is identical, only the scale of the underlying litigation differs.

The Wider Lesson for Complex Litigation

Whatever the eventual figure, this case is a useful reminder that legal costs are often among the largest financial consequences of bringing or defending substantial litigation, arguably as significant as the underlying dispute itself. It also illustrates why courts increasingly intervene early through costs budgeting and case management, rather than leaving costs entirely unchecked until the end of a case.

For solicitors advising clients on High Court litigation of any scale, cases like this reinforce the value of realistic costs budgeting from the outset, and of understanding how proportionality is assessed once a costs order is actually made.

Quick FAQs

Does Prince Harry have to pay the full amount reported in the media?

Not necessarily. Reported figures are estimates of the costs incurred; the final amount recoverable depends on assessment, which often reduces the sum originally claimed.

Why do the losing parties pay the winner’s costs?

Under the general rule in civil litigation, the unsuccessful party is ordinarily ordered to contribute towards the successful party’s reasonably incurred legal costs, so the winner isn’t left out of pocket for defending a claim.

What happens if the parties can’t agree the amount?

The costs go through detailed assessment, where a costs judge examines whether the sums claimed are reasonable and proportionate before deciding the final figure.

How Greener Costs Can Help

Our team of costs lawyers and costs draftsmen advises solicitors and their clients on costs budgeting, proportionality and detailed assessment in complex, high-value litigation.

If you’d like advice on managing costs risk in a substantial case, get in touch with the Greener Costs team today for a free, no-obligation discussion; call us on 01204 263047 or email info@greenercosts.co.uk.