Lawyer says Prince Harry's words undermine phone hack case

LONDON -

An attorney for the publisher of The Sun tabloid used Prince Harry's own words Thursday to argue that his phone hacking lawsuit should be thrown out.

Attorney Anthony Hudson said emails from the Duke of Sussex to the Royal Family's chief spokesperson indicated he was well enough aware of allegations against the publisher that he could have brought a lawsuit in a timely manner.

Harry first became aware that one of his voicemails had been intercepted in 2006 and knew he had a claim to bring in 2012, Hudson said.

• Royal Dispatch newsletter: Sign up for exclusive insights on the monarchy

But the prince only began pushing Buckingham Palace in late 2017 and early 2018 to pressure the British newspaper arm of Rupert Murdoch's media empire to apologize for hacking his phone.

"There needs to be an ultimatum otherwise this institution and everything it stands for becomes a laughingstock," the Duke of Sussex emailed the chief spokesperson for the royal family in February 2018, according to court records.

After a three day hearing in the High Court, Hudson asked a judge to throw out the hacking suits brought by Harry and actor Hugh Grant, arguing they had ample knowledge to file claims within a six-year time limit.

"It is utterly hopeless, unreal and fanciful to suggest they could not have embarked on the ... claims they have since brought," Hudson said.

Justice Timothy Fancourt said he would rule at a later date.

Attorney David Sherborne argued that the two were aware of hacking by a rogue reporter at the former News Of The World, which Murdoch owned, but didn't realize how widespread the interceptions were until a much bigger scandal erupted in 2011 that drove the paper out of business.

They were prevented from learning about snooping by The Sun, another Murdoch newspaper, because News Group Newspapers executives concealed evidence and lied, Sherborne said. He argued that the cover-up created an exception to the time limit for filing the lawsuit.

Sherborne also argued that Harry was prevented from bringing a case because of a "secret agreement" the royal family had with Murdoch's company. The alleged agreement was intended to shield the royals from having to testify in court and be confronted with embarrassing evidence, Harry said.

Harry said he was told he couldn't file suit because the agreement -- approved by the late Queen Elizabeth II -- called for News Group to reach a settlement and issue an apology to the royal family after settling its other litigation in the voicemail hacking scandal.

Fancourt said he was troubled by what appeared to be a "factual inconsistency" between Harry's claim that he didn't have knowledge before 2019 to bring a lawsuit and the prince's saying that he would have brought a case in 2012 if not for the secret agreement.

But Sherborne said he did not have enough knowledge in 2012 to bring the claim he eventually filed because he only knew about one instance of hacking.

When it appeared News Group was stalling, Harry got fed up and filed suit against the company in 2019. It's one of three phone hacking cases he has pending against Britain's tabloid publishers.

News Group denied the existence of a secret agreement and said The Sun "does not accept liability or make any admissions to the allegations."

Buckingham Palace did not immediately reply to an email seeking comment on the alleged agreement.