The duke and Baroness Doreen Lawrence declared the ruling had been a 'whitewash'
Prince Harry and Baroness Doreen Lawrence have been accused of "abusing their positions as well-known figures" to publicly criticise the judge, who found against them in their case against the publisher of the Daily Mail.
The Duke and Baroness Lawrence are two of seven high-profile claimants facing a legal bill of almost £34.5 million, after failing to convince Mr Justice Nicklin they had been victims of unlawful information gathering by journalists working for Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL).
Following the ruling earlier this month, the pair launched a scathing public attack on the judge, declaring the ruling had been a "whitewash".
Despite this, none of the seven claimants are currently appealing the judgement and have accepted they have lost their case.
During a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Wednesday, both sides put their case forward about how much money the claimants are liable for.
ANL argues the company has incurred costs of almost £34.5million, and has asked Mr Justice Nicklin to rule the claimants are liable for all of the costs.
This is because, in ANL's view, the claimants made extremely serious allegations against dozens of journalists (that could not be proved) and repeatedly changed or abandoned parts of their case.
This, in turn, forced ANL to spend tens of millions of pounds defending its reputation, meaning Prince Harry and others should pay far more than is standard practice - known as indemnity costs.
Anthony White KC, acting on behalf of ANL, alleged Prince Harry and the other claimants were used for a "politically motivated" attack on the Daily Mail.
He argued the litigation was pursued by activists linked to the Hacked Off campaign, desperate to prove the Daily Mail had acted unlawfully in an attempt to revive Leveson 2 - a cancelled public inquiry which could have curtailed press freedoms.
This is something the claimant's lawyer insisted "couldn't be further from the truth" and suggested the publisher of the Daily Mail was "going for the jugular" to punish the claimants for daring to take them on.
LATEST ROYAL NEWS
Meanwhile, it has been revealed the claimants took out After The Event (ATE) insurance worth £16.2million, so they did not have to personally face paying out millions of pounds if they lost the case.
However, ANL spent £18million over the court's approved litigation budget, which the claimants allege they were not informed about.
This meant sufficient insurance was not sought to cover the full cost of a loss, according to the claimants' lawyers.
Meanwhile, the Duke of Sussex and other claimants argue that the judge accepted they acted honestly during litigation, and genuinely believed they had been victims of unlawful information gathering.
Lawyers acting for the claimants insist there was evidence raising legitimate suspicions, but ultimately couldn't provide enough proof needed for the legal threshold to fall in their favour - meaning they are not liable for more than standard costs.
