The High Court has dismissed a legal case brought by the Duke of Sussex and five other people who claimed that Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) systematically gathered information illegally.

高等法院已駁回由薩塞克斯公爵與另外五人提出的法律訴訟，原告指控 Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) 系統性地非法搜集資訊。

The case focused on 97 allegations based on 55 articles published between 1997 and 2015. The claimants, including Sir Elton John and Baroness Doreen Lawrence, asserted that ANL used illegal methods such as hacking voicemails, installing spying devices, and stealing private financial data. However, Mr Justice Nicklin decided that the claimants did not provide enough evidence to prove these illegal activities. The court ruled that if the information could have come from legal sources, such as press officers or friends, it could not be assumed that the methods were illegal.

本案聚焦於 1997 年至 2015 年間發表的 55 篇文章中涉及的 97 項指控。原告方，包括艾爾頓·約翰爵士與多琳·勞倫斯男爵夫人，主張 ANL 採取了非法手段，例如截獲語音郵件、安裝監視設備以及盜取私人財務數據。然而，尼克林法官裁定原告方未能提供足夠證據證明這些非法活動。法院判定，若資訊可能來自合法來源（例如新聞官或友人），則不能假設其獲取手段為非法。

This case is different from previous lawsuits by the Duke of Sussex against other newspaper groups, which ended in apologies and payments. In contrast, ANL always denied the claims and insisted they followed the law. The judge found that the evidence in this case was weak; for example, the testimony of a key witness was considered unreliable because his statements contradicted each other. Furthermore, the court stated that some evidence provided by a campaigner was not convincing because it was bought from third parties.

本案與薩塞克斯公爵先前針對其他報業集團的訴訟不同，後者最終以道歉和賠償告終。相比之下，ANL 始終否認指控並堅持其合法運作。法官發現本案證據不足；例如，一名關鍵證人的證詞被認為不可靠，因為其陳述自相矛盾。此外，法院表示一名運動人士提供的部分證據缺乏說服力，因為該證據是向第三方購買的。

Responses to the verdict have been very different. The claimants described the decision as a 'whitewash,' whereas ANL and its former editor, Paul Dacre, called the lawsuit 'misguided.' Additionally, the financial impact is huge, as legal costs are estimated at £50 million, and the court must now decide who will pay this amount.

各界對判決的反應迥異。原告方將此決定描述為「掩蓋真相」，而 ANL 及其前總編輯 Paul Dacre 則稱該訴訟為「誤導」。此外，財務影響巨大，法律費用估計高達 5,000 萬英鎊，法院目前必須決定由誰承擔這筆費用。

The High Court has cleared Associated Newspapers Ltd of the charges, effectively ending a long period of phone-hacking lawsuits in the UK.

高等法院已洗清 Associated Newspapers Ltd 的指控，有效地結束了英國一段漫長的電話截聽訴訟期。