Elizabeth Hurley has said she felt “crushed” by her privacy being invaded by the press, the trial against the publisher of the Daily Mail has been told.
In her witness statement, Hurley alleges that the Mail tapped her landlines and placed “surreptitious mics on my home windows” in an effort to get stories.
The actress became tearful as she gave evidence in her case against the Mail and Mail on Sunday publisher Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) at London’s Royal Courts of Justice on Thursday.
She is one of seven high-profile claimants accusing ANL of “grave breaches of privacy” over a 20-year period. The publisher has denied wrongdoing.
Hurley’s claim relates to 15 articles published between 2002 and 2011, through which she says ANL “wilfully exploited my stolen information using its arsenal of illegal means”. Five of those are about her son, Damian, and his late father, film producer Steve Bing.
She alleges the Mail also stole her medical information while she was pregnant with Damian, whom she calls the “centre of my world”.
She is also claiming for 10 more articles which “were written by journalists who were commissioning other private investigators to do similar unlawful things”, she said in her statement.
When shown some of the articles relating to her claim, she became tearful in court and wiped her eyes and nose with a tissue.
In tears, she said it was “deeply hurtful” to read the statement of a private investigator, Gavin Burrows, who Hurley alleges admitted, “bugging and listening to all my conversations.”
Hurley told the court on Thursday that she had learned about Burrows’ statement just before Christmas in 2020. He has denied he made it and claimed the signature on the document was false.
Hurley said in her witness statement that discovering the alleged phone tapping “devastated me”.
“I had not come across this brutal invasion of privacy in either of my two battles with the other newspapers,” she said.
“It wasn’t just phone hacking… it was a violation on a whole different mortifying and enraging scale.”
She became emotional as she concluded her evidence, saying she found it “traumatic” to appear before the court.
“With respect, I don’t want to be here,” she told her lawyer, and said it was “very painful” to discuss the events of the past.
When asked in the witness box why she had not previously taken legal action against the publisher, Hurley said it was because from what she remembered, “complaints were for libel” and the articles were “in essence true”.
“I believe that is because people were listening to me speak,” she told the court.
It was put to her by Antony White KC for ANL that there had been “leaks in your camp” which had led to stories, and she agreed she had initially thought that.
But Hurley insisted that none of her close friends would have talked to the press without her permission.
Challenged about a 2001 story in Hello Magazine, the barrister pointed out that two friends had been quoted talking about her.
“They would never ever say anything indiscreet about me,” she replied.
Another claimant, the Duke of Sussex, was seen entering the court after a spokesperson said he would be present “to support, and show solidarity”.
Joining Hurley and Prince Harry in bringing the lawsuit against ANL are:
- Fellow actress Sadie Frost
- Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish
- Sir Simon Hughes, the former Liberal Democrat MP
- Baroness Doreen Lawrence, a campaigner whose son Stephen Lawrence was murdered in a racist attack in south London in 1993
The claimants have accused ANL of “clear, systematic and sustained use of unlawful information gathering” for stories between 1993 and “beyond” 2018, including through private investigators and blagging.
ANL has previously denied allegations of unlawful information gathering.
White, representing the publisher, has said the claimants are “clutching at straws” and that the claims had been brought too late.
Privacy cases must usually be brought within six years of the alleged breach, unless victims can show they could not bring a case at the time.
White argued the reporters behind the stories had provided a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing of articles”, saying that in some cases celebrities’ friends and social circles contributed as sources to Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday journalists.
In court on Wednesday, he suggested Prince Harry knew his social circle was “leaky”, to which the prince, giving evidence, responded: “My social circles were not leaky, I want to make that absolutely clear.”
Prince Harry was visibly emotional in the witness box as he said the publisher made the life of his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, “an absolute misery”.
The prince’s voice broke as he said the court battle had been a “horrible experience” for his family and that all he wanted was “an apology and some accountability”.
The case continues and is expected to last nine weeks. This is a civil trial, so there is no jury and the judge, Mr Justice Nicklin, will decide the case on his own.