London's High Court was packed on Monday morning in expectation Prince Harry would give evidence in his lawsuit against a tabloid publisher. Except, to the surprise of everyone including the judge, the prince wasn't there.
Prince Harry is one of four claimants accusing the Mirror Newspaper Group (MGN) of phone hacking and engaging private investigators to obtain information about them.
Monday marked the beginning of his individual case against the publisher.
The judge presiding over the case, Mr Justice Fancourt, said he was "surprised" at the Duke of Sussex's non-attendance.
While the duke was not scheduled to give evidence until Tuesday, the judge had previously directed that each of the claimants be present in the court for the first day of their individual case, in case opening statements ran short and there was time in the day to begin evidence.
Prince Harry's lawyer, Mr David Sherbourne, said a number of factors meant he could not be in attendance.
He said Prince Harry was at home in Los Angeles on Sunday to celebrate his daughter Princess Lilibet's 2nd birthday, and had flown into London that evening.
Unique travel and security arrangements made things a "little bit tricky", Mr Sherbourne said.
Lawyers acting for the defendant accused Prince Harry of "time wasting", and said it was "absolutely extraordinary" that he had not made himself available for the court.
"I have to cross-examine [Prince Harry] on 33 articles and that cannot be done in one day," Andrew Green KC said.
The judge assured Mr Green he would not be restricted to one day of cross-examination, indicating the court would extend its sitting if need be.
Prince Harry's lawyer then proceeded with his opening statement, which references the 147 articles submitted as examples of unlawful information gathering by the Mirror group.
He criticised MGN for not providing more of its journalists to give evidence.
"The list of witnesses who are not being called in relation to Prince Harry’s claim is so long that I will only identify them when I go through individual articles," Mr Sherbourne said.
Mr Sherbourne also accused MGN of engendering the "mistrust" between Prince Harry and his brother Prince William, the heir to the throne, with whom he has had a high-profile falling out in recent years since Harry and his wife, Meghan, stepped down from royal duties and moved to the United States
An article from 2003 about the brothers disagreeing over how to treat their mother's former butler showed "the seeds of discord between these two brothers are starting to be sown", Mr Sherbourne said.
Mr Green said there was no evidence that Prince Harry's phone was hacked once, let alone habitually, and none of those who had admitted illegally listening to voicemail messages said they had targeted the duke.
MGN has already acknowledged and apologised for one incident of hacking the Prince's phone for a story, accepting he was entitled to compensation.
The publisher has also previously been found to have engaged in unlawful information gathering targeting other celebrities, and has settled hundreds of claims.
What Prince Harry and his fellow claimants hope to achieve in this case is for a legal decision to be made as to whether senior editors and executives knew about and approved the practice.
