Prince Harry seeks win in libel case against tabloid without trial as he sues over security story

Lawyers for Prince Harry asked a judge on Friday to rule that a tabloid newspaper libelled the British royal with an article about his quest for police protection when he and his family visit the UK.

Harry is suing Mail on Sunday publisher Associated Newspapers Ltd over an article alleging he tried to hush up his separate legal challenge over the British government's refusal to let him pay for police security.

The Duke of Sussex, as he's also known, was not in court for the hearing.

READ MORE: Meghan shares new project amid rumours she is about to relaunch popular lifestyle blog

During a hearing at the High Court in London, Harry's lead attorney asked Judge Matthew Nicklin either to strike out the publisher's defence or to deliver a summary judgment, which would be a ruling in the prince's favour without going to trial.

Lawyer Justin Rushbrooke said the facts did not support the publisher's "substantive pleaded defence" that the article expressed an "honest opinion".

He said the article was "fundamentally inaccurate."

READ MORE: What Oprah thinks Harry and Meghan should do about coronation

Prince Harry sued Associated Newspapers over a February 2022 Mail on Sunday article headlined "Exclusive: How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight with the government over police bodyguards a secret… then – just minutes after the story broke – his PR machine tried to put a positive spin on the dispute."

He claims that the newspaper libelled him when it suggested that he'd lied in his initial public statements about the suit against the government.

In July, Nicklin ruled that the article was defamatory, allowing the case to proceed. The judge has not yet considered issues such as whether the story was accurate or in the public interest.

The publisher's lawyer, Andrew Caldecott, said the argument by Harry's attorneys amounted to "straitjacketing the newspaper's right to comment."

He said it was vital the media speak truth to power, and "speaking opinion to power is every bit (as), if not more, important," as long as the opinion is based on facts.

At the end of the daylong hearing, the judge said he would rule at a later date.

Harry and Meghan lost their publicly funded UK police protection when they stepped down as senior working royals and moved to North America in 2020.

The 38-year-old prince wants to pay personally for police security when he comes to Britain, but the government said that wasn't possible. Last year, a judge gave Harry permission to sue the government. That case has yet to come to trial.

Harry's lawyers have said previously the prince is reluctant to bring the couple's children — Prince Archie, who is almost 4, and Princess Lilibet, nearly 2 — to his homeland because it is not safe.

The royal also has three other cases against British newspaper groups, with the Duke of Sussex set to take the stand in his phone-hacking case against Mirror Group Newspapers in May.