Elizabeth Hurley has asserted that private investigators, employed by the Daily Mail, engaged in an egregious invasion of her privacy by bugging her landline and installing microphones on her windows, all in an attempt to obtain sensational stories. The actress became emotional as she testified in court against the paper's publisher, particularly focusing on articles written about her son, Damian. She described the alleged activity as a "brutal invasion of privacy" and a "gross violation" of her privacy rights.
She is one of seven high-profile individuals accusing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) of "serious breaches of privacy" over a 20-year period. The publisher has denied any wrongdoing.
Hurley's claim relates to 15 articles published between 2002 and 2011, through which she alleges ANL "willfully exploited my stolen information using its arsenal of illegal means." Five of these articles were about Damian and his late father, film producer Steve Bing. She further alleges that the Mail also stole her medical information while she was pregnant with Damian, whom she calls the "center of my world."
One story, published the day after Damian's birth in 2002, included details about Hurley's hospital stay. Others focused on payments Bing made to Hurley and his refusal to see their son. On Thursday, Hurley told the court: "I felt truly mortified that my son would one day read all this stuff, and I feel terrible that that day is today when all this stuff is being regurgitated again."
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 had been "deeply hurtful" to read the statement of a private investigator, Gavin Burrows, who Hurley alleges admitted to "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 making the statement and claimed the signature on the document was false.
Hurley said in her witness statement that discovering the alleged phone tapping was what "devastated me." "I had not come across this brutal invasion of privacy in either of my two battles with 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 argued that there had been "leaks in your camp" which had led to stories, and she agreed that 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, where two friends were quoted talking about her, she replied: "They would never ever say anything indiscreet about me."
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, and 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.
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.
