Sir Simon Hughes requested a few words be spoken on his behalf in court this afternoon

One of Prince Harry's fellow claimants against the Daily Mail has appeared to distance himself from the duke, claiming he "was not a campaigner" against the publisher.

Former Government minister Sir Simon Hughes was one of the seven prominent figures - alongside Baroness Doreen Lawrence, Sir Elton John, David Furnish, Sadie Frost, Liz Hurley - to bring allegations of unlawful information-gathering against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).

ANL vigorously contested the accusations throughout an 11-week trial in London.

On July 7, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled against all seven claimants, dismissing every case - a decision that Harry and Baroness Lawrence declared a "complete and obvious whitewash".

The group now face a monstrous legal bill after ANL revealed their costs were in excess of £34million, a figure Mr Justice Nicklin described as "unprecedented" for a media law dispute at High Court level.

The matter returned to the High Court this week for two days of argument over who should bear the financial burden, with a ruling anticipated in the week commencing August 17.

Today, during the second day of deliberation in court, Nicholas Bacon KC, representing the group of seven, said he had been contacted by Sir Simon overnight.

Mr Bacon said he had been requested to "say some things on his behalf".

"He wishes to make it clear he was not a campaigner against Associated," Mr Bacon said.

"It was not part of his case or plan to target ANL, its people or its papers.

"At no time did he publicly ally his case to the other claimants.

LATEST ROYAL NEWS

"He is not a celebrity and was at the time a responsible senior MP and minister of state."

Mr White claimed that Sir Simon had accused ANL of "widespread criminality of the most heinous form".

He added: "He has not withdrawn any of those allegations - not one."

Mr Justice Nicklin said there will be "time for reflection for Sir Simon Hughes to review how the case was conducted and the extent to which it doesn't meet the objective he was looking for".

Mr Justice Nicklin confirmed that the claimants will be required to make the interim payment by August 28 - the publisher is seeking more than £9.9million.

"They are going to be paying a sum of money that I will confirm in the judgment," the judge stated at the conclusion of Thursday's hearing.

The court was told the interim figure would be a "global" amount that could then be divided among the seven individuals.

The judge's written ruling later this month will settle both the size of the initial payment and whether costs are assessed on a standard or indemnity basis.