Prince Harry phone hacking – live: Piers Morgan denies wrongdoing as judge rules Duke was Mirror victim

Watch from outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London after the Duke of Sussex won damages against a tabloid newspaper publisher on Friday 15 December.

Prince Harry has been awarded £140,600 after bringing a phone hacking claim against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN).

Mr Justice Fancourt concluded there was “extensive” phone hacking generally by MGN from 2006 to 2011, “even to some extent” during the Leveson Inquiry into media standards.

Watch here:

Piers Morgan has announced he will “shortly” be making a statement in response to Prince Harry’s hacking win against the Mirror publisher.

Writing on X, the Talk TV presenter said: “I'll be making a statement responding to the Prince Harry v Mirror Group judgment shortly.”

In a direct address to reporters, he added: “So all you guys camped outside my house in the cold won't have to have to wait much longer.”

Mr Justice Fancourt ruled at the High Court on Friday that Mr Morgan knew about and was involved in phone hacking when he was editor of the Daily Mirror.

Mr Morgan has previously always denied any direct knowledge of phone hacking during his time as a tabloid newspaper editor.

Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) apologised “unreservedly” for “historical wrongdoing” following Friday’s ruling.

An MGN spokesperson said: “We 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.”

Harry’s case was heard alongside similar claims brought by actor Michael Turner, who is known professionally as Michael Le Vell and is most famous for playing Kevin Webster in Coronation Street, actress Nikki Sanderson and Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse.

The allegations in their claims about unlawful activity at MGN’s titles covered a period from as early as 1991 until at least 2011, the court was previously told.

Claims brought by Ms Sanderson and Ms Wightman were dismissed by Mr Justice Fancourt because they were made too late, despite the judge finding that some of their complaints were proved.

Mr Turner was awarded a total of £31,650 in damages after the judge ruled his phone hacking and unlawful information-gathering case was “proved only to a limited extent”.

Their cases were considered as “representative” of the types of allegations facing MGN and Mr Justice Fancourt’s findings could affect the outcome of other claims, which include challenges brought by actor Ricky Tomlinson, the estate of the late singer George Michael, ex-footballer and television presenter Ian Wright and Girls Aloud singer Cheryl.

The judgment passed today “lays bare the extraordinary cover-up” by Mirror Group Newspapers over decades, the CEO of Hacked Off has said.

Nathan Sparkes, chief of the campaign for a free and accountable press that was set up in response to the phone-hacking revelations, said: "Today's judgment lays bare the extraordinary cover-up which has taken place at Mirror Group Newspapers over the last two decades. It paints the picture of a rotten corporate culture, desperate to escape accountability at all costs. Other newspaper groups will also be looking over their shoulders, as this judgment shows that justice may yet catch up with them all.”

He added: “This case serves as yet another reminder of the urgent need for effective and independent self-regulation of the press to protect the interests of ordinary people who are victims of wrongdoing by powerful and unaccountable newspaper groups.”

Prince Harry has partially won his latest legal battle and has been awarded damages, as a High Court judge ruled that he was the victim of phone-hacking by Mirror newspapers.

The Duke of Sussex was one of four test cases selected to be heard after he sued Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) for obtaining information using unlawful means, such as private investigators or gaining information by deception.

Mr Justice Fancourt ruled that 15 out of 33 articles examined were the product of hacking and that his personal phone had been targeted between 2003 and 2009, before awarding him £140,600 for the distress caused.

Holly Evans reports from the Royal Courts of Justice:

Here is more from the Duke of Sussex’s statement, as delivered on his behalf by his barrister David Sherborne outside the Rolls Building:

“The journey to justice can be a slow and painful one. And since bringing my claim almost five years ago, defamatory stories and intimidating tactics have been deployed against me and at my family’s expense.

“And so, as I too have learned through this process, patience is in fact a virtue, especially in the face of vendetta journalism. I hope that the court’s findings will serve as a warning to all media organisations who have employed these practices, and then similarly lied about them.

“Mirror Group’s actions were so calculated and misleading that their pattern of destroying evidence and concealing their unlawful behaviour continued into the litigation itself. And as the judge has ruled, even to this day.”

In his written judgement, Mr Justice Fancourt details the 15 articles proven to have been sourced as a result of phone-hacking and unlawful information-gathering, with the majority relating to Prince Harry’s relationship with former girlfriend Chelsy Davy.

They include damages awarded for an article relating to their arguments after a visit to a lap dancing club, phone calls detailing the deterioration of their relationship and arrangements for her to visit him at Kensington Palace.

Mr Justice Fancourt said the unlawful activity was “concealed” from Parliament, shareholders and the public, as well as the board overseeing MGN.

In his summary of the ruling, the judge said the board as a whole was not told about it, but that it should have been investigated at the latest in early 2007.

“Instead, it was concealed from the board, from Parliament in 2007 and 2011, from the Leveson Inquiry, from shareholders, and from the public for years, and the extent of it was concealed from claimants in the Mirror Newspapers hacking litigation and even from the court at and before the trial in 2015," he said.

Referring to private investigators used by the Mirror newspapers, Mr Justice Fancourt found that 11 out of the 51 had been used “very substantially” by the publisher to carry out “very extensive and habitual unlawful information gathering”.

He described them as an “integral part of the system”, while another 13 private investigators were used on a less frequent basis but did a “significant amount”, while a further five did some work but not to the same extent and volume as the others.

The court found no sufficient evidence relation to 14 other investigators, while another 10 were based and operating abroad and no case could be proven that their behaviour was unlawful.