Prince Harry suffers legal setback after a judge intervened to stop some of his witnesses giving ‘commentary’ rather than relevant evidence at his trial against The Sun’s publisher

Prince Harry suffered a legal setback yesterday when a judge intervened to prevent some of his witnesses from providing ‘commentary’ – rather than relevant evidence – during his trial against the publisher of The Sun.

The newspaper has urged the court to prevent the Duke of Sussex from turning the upcoming court case into a “public inquiry” against the press.

And yesterday, Judge Fancourt ordered Harry’s lawyers to curtail a series of witness statements, including those of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, ex-Commons chairman John Bercow and Maria, the mother of singer Charlotte Church.

He said some of what they had to say was “mere commentary or argument.”

According to courtroom rules, witnesses can only provide evidence of facts directly relevant to a case.

Less than two weeks pass before a blockbuster trial, expected to last eight weeks, between Prince Harry and former Labor deputy leader Lord Tom Watson against News Group Newspapers begins at the High Court.

The pair are suing for alleged unlawful information collection and invasion of privacy.

A string of high-profile witnesses are lining up to testify on their behalf.

The Duke of Sussex (pictured March 2023) will return to Britain in the new year to testify in the eight-week trial

But the judge said in a written ruling that the content of many of their witness statements showed “a lack of proper understanding” of court rules “or indifference” toward them.

He added: ‘It seems to me that some witnesses… wanted to express their strong views about the way they were treated by the police. [newspaper group]or submit comments’.

He said Harry’s lawyers should have excluded such elements but “didn’t do so.”

Judge Fancourt ordered that the statements of ten witnesses be deleted.

In addition to those of Mr Brown and Mr Bercow, the statements of former Liberal Democrat ministers Sir Vince Cable and Chris Huhne should also be shortened.

The judge said Harry’s legal team had already agreed that some of what the witnesses said “will not be relied upon” and that other parts were “clearly not evidence that could be given at trial” and/or are merely commentary or argumentation’.

As for two other potential witnesses, including Charlotte Church’s mother, the judge said “none or virtually none” of their evidence was “relevant to the issues for the court to determine, and/or is merely commentary or argument.”

In his ruling, the judge awarded the newspaper half of the costs related to the row over witness statements, saying the newspaper had been partly successful but had also been “overly optimistic” in other respects in its efforts to to downplay evidence.

Lord Watson (pictured in April 2019) and Harry are the only two to continue the case against the publisher of The Sun

Harry and his sole remaining co-plaintiff Tom Watson, (pictured) the former Labor deputy leader, allege that journalists from The Sun and the defunct News of the World unlawfully obtained their private information

Prince Harry will fly to Britain next month to spend four days in the witness box, where he will be questioned by the newspaper group’s lawyer.

It will be the duke’s second court appearance after giving evidence in 2023 before the same judge who charged the Mirror Group Newspapers with phone hacking.

After winning that case, Harry declared himself a ‘dragon slayer’ and vowed to continue his crusade against the press.

In the new trial, the Duke will be questioned about his claims that News Group Newspapers publications used unlawful techniques to obtain information about him.

He claims his privacy was breached in at least 30 articles written about him, including the day he found out he had been accepted to Eton in 1998.

Around 39 other claimants, including Hugh Grant, who had joined Harry in the current tranche of the managed class action, have settled out of court, with only the Duke and Lord Watson continuing to pursue the case.

At a pre-trial hearing last month, Anthony Hudson KC, the newspaper group’s lawyer, accused Prince Harry’s side of “an attempt to turn the January trial into a form of public inquiry.”

He referred to recent comments made by the Duke of Sussex at an event in New York about the refusal to settle the case and “take the case forward”, saying: “It shows what is really going on here… where it is clearly about is almost by definition a public inquiry.’

David Sherborne, representing the Duke and Lord Watson, responded by telling the judge: ‘Saying this is an exaggeration – it’s a public inquiry and so on – doesn’t help your rule.’

News Group Newspapers denies wrongdoing and the case is due to begin on January 20.