The Duke of Sussex is “very close” to reaching a settlement with The Sun’s publishers, postponing the date of his long-awaited High Court trial.
On Tuesday, as the trial was about to begin, a last-minute deal between Duke and News Group Newspapers (NGN) was being discussed behind the scenes.
But the last-minute delay infuriated the judge, in part because of the time difference in California, where the duke lives.
His refusal to grant a third adjournment for almost as much time raised the extraordinary prospect of both sides joining forces to seek intervention from the Court of Appeal.
Just weeks ago, the duke vowed never to settle allegations of illegal information gathering and insisted his only goal was to pursue accountability.
Any potential deal would represent a dramatic end to a five-year legal battle that has imposed staggering costs on both sides and taken up significant amounts of court time.
NGN, which has strongly denied allegations of wrongdoing, has settled around 1,300 claims without admitting any liability, leaving the duke and former Labor deputy leader Lord Tom Watson as the last survivors.
The duke’s lawyer, David Sherborne, and Anthony Hudson KC, representing NGN, twice asked Judge Fancourt to adjourn the case to allow negotiations to take place.
But when they returned to court to ask for a third postponement, the judge said he saw no reason why the trial couldn’t run concurrently with the discussions.
David Sherborne (left) representing the Duke – BENJAMIN CREMEL/AFP
Visibly frustrated, he questioned why such negotiations had not taken place earlier when the fact remained “yesterday, the day before yesterday, last week and the week before that”.
“I don’t believe that if there was a real will to resolve this issue, first of all, that would not be possible today,” he added, telling lawyers they had “ample time to seek to resolve their differences.”
The judge also said he was “not satisfied” that the delay had “anything to do with California’s timeline.”
Shortly after Judge Fancourt entered the courtroom at 10.30am on Tuesday morning, Mr Sherborne jumped to his feet and asked for a brief adjournment.
He also asked the judge to ensure that the main arguments – summaries of both sides’ cases – are not distributed at the same time.
“I was asked to ask your honor if we could have a brief adjournment for an hour,” he said. “I understand this may cause some inconvenience.”
further delays
When the trial resumed at 11.30am, Mr Sherborne asked for “a little more time to continue discussions”.
He acknowledged that this was putting pressure on the trial timetable but said some witnesses due to testify next week would no longer be cross-examined, giving them “some wiggle room”.
The judge reluctantly agreed but said this would be the last adjournment.
When the court reconvened at 2pm, the judge was visibly annoyed when Mr Sherborne asked for a third adjournment.
“We don’t do this lightly, but we do believe that a few more hours today could be productive given the progress between the two sides,” he said.
Mr Hudson agreed, adding: “There have been very intense discussions over the past few days… Lawyers on both sides have been involved in intense negotiations and the reality is we are very close.
“There are timing issues – instructions being required due to time differences – and those timing difficulties will be resolved very quickly this afternoon.”
“Secret Hearing”
Urging the judge not to start the trial until discussions are concluded, he said “other matters will occur at the beginning of the trial that will have a very significant impact on the dynamics of the settlement”.
Mr Hudson revealed that “once the trial commences there will be a very substantial sum to be paid”, which appears to be a reference to legal fees.
The judge refused to delay further, insisting he would not allow a “secret hearing” to take place outside court.
He said he saw nothing in the basic arguments that contained any “shocking new events or allegations” that had not yet come to light and did not see why the trial should not begin.
He subsequently refused permission for both parties to appeal his decision but said: “I will not stand in the way of access to justice for the parties if they wish to appeal to the Court of Appeal.”
It was confirmed late on Monday that the duke would not attend the opening of the trial, but no explanation was given.
Judge Fancourt repeatedly urged both sides to find a solution, warning that the case resembled a battle between “two stubborn but well-resourced armies.”
The hearing is scheduled to resume on Wednesday.
