Elizabeth Hurley hit back at suggestions of “leaks” among her friends as she gave evidence in the privacy trial against the publisher of the Daily Mail – and became tearful as she spoke about the impact of articles written about her private life.
The actress and model spent about three hours in the witness box at the High Court, where she and six others, including Prince Harry and Sir Elton John, are suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) over allegations of unlawful information gathering.
ANL strenuously denies wrongdoing and also argues the claims have been brought too late.
The allegations in Hurley’s case relate to 15 articles published between 2002 and 2011.
In a written witness statement submitted to the court, Hurley, 60, said the Daily Mail’s alleged unlawful acts involved “tapping my phones and recording my live telephone conversations, placing surreptitious mics on my home windows” and “other monstrous, staggering things”.
She said the alleged tapping of her landline was a “brutal invasion of privacy” that left her feeling “crushed”.
In court, she explained in front of Judge Nicklin how there had been an “avalanche” of articles written about her in the 2000s, and particularly after the birth of her son, Damian. Many were “unpleasant”, she told the court.
Hurley became tearful and wiped her eyes several times during her evidence, but each time said she wanted to carry on rather than taking a break.
“I felt really mortified that my son would be able to read all this stuff one day, and I feel really bad that that day is today when all this stuff is being regurgitated again,” Hurley said.
“Yet again, everyone’s privacy is being invaded in this terrible way, and I feel very helpless about that.”
Damian Hurley sat in court to support his mother – joined in the morning by Prince Harry, following his own evidence yesterday. As he arrived at court, Sky News asked the duke how he was feeling – to which he turned and smiled, replying: “Great, thank you.”
‘I believe people were listening to me’
During questioning by Antony White KC, representing ANL, Hurley hit back at his suggestion of “leaks” among her friends.
Asked why she did not complain about the articles in her claim at the time they were published, Hurley said she had always thought “complaints were for libel” – and these stories “were in essence true”.
She continued: “I believe that is because people were listening to me speak.”
There were “microphones on the windowsill of my dining room” and her rooms and landlines were “bugged”, Hurley told the court.
“Yes, there were leaks, but they were not from my friends,” she said.
Hurley was also questioned about her friendship with her ex-boyfriend Hugh Grant, and the extent of her involvement with Hacked Off, the press reform group he campaigns for.
The actress told the court she had donated £350,000 damages awarded to her after a settlement with Mirror Group Newspapers, but was not involved with the group – pushing back on that suggestion from White several times.
At the end of her evidence, David Sherborne, who is representing Hurley and the other claimants, asked her how she felt about having to come to court “as a result of Associated denying the claims”.
Hurley responded: “I don’t really want to be here, didn’t want to come.
“I find it intimidating. I find it quite traumatic. I don’t really like talking about things that happened to me in the past.”
Becoming emotional, she added: “I find it very painful.”
Read more:
The latest updates from court
Analysis: Harry’s short time in the witness box
Be the first to get Breaking News
Install the Sky News app for free
What has ANL said?
During his opening statement to the trial earlier this week, Mr White described the allegations against the publisher as “threadbare”, and said ANL journalists have a “compelling account of a pattern of legitimate sourcing” of the articles in question.
In a written submission for the trial, the lawyer said allegations of unlawful information gathering (UIG) against ANL, “including of phone hacking and phone tapping, in connection with Ms Hurley or her 10 named associates”, are “unsupported by the evidence before the court”.
The claims are “entirely baseless”, he went on, and “borne of an attempt by members of the claimants’ research team, adopted by Ms Hurley and her legal representatives, to present a case of UIG against Associated based entirely on spurious and, or, discredited information.”
Further witnesses for the claimants are due to give evidence next week, before witnesses for ANL are called later on.
The trial is set to last about nine weeks, with a decision expected at a later date.
