Prince Harry's lawyer sees last-ditch attempt to submit new evidence blocked by judge in dramatic final day
The Duke of Sussex testified against Mirror Group Newspaper (MGN) in the phone-hacking case earlier this month
PA
Prince Harry's lawyer was dealt a blow today as a last-ditch attempt to submit evidence was blocked by the High Court judge on the final day of the royal's privacy case.
Today, David Sherborne tried to submit new evidence which he claimed had recently come to light.
GB News' Cameron Walker explained: "The evidence relates to a letter sent to the judge by one of the journalists who wrote one of the articles that are being tested in this case where Prince Harry alleges unlawful information activity took place in order to write the article.
"David Sherborne, who is Prince Harry's lawyer, says this letter contains direct evidence in relation to the particular origin of the information of which the article has been complained about by Prince Harry.
"It relates to voice notes interception allegedly carried out post-2006 and related to the Duke of Sussex."
The Royal Correspondent continued: "Now the judge asked why is this being brought to evidence so late when you wrapped up your evidence last week? There has to be an endpoint.
"David Sherborne in response to that said, it is very relevant. It directly relates to questions that your Lordship needs to determine.
"In other words, it could help the judge to decide whether or not Prince Harry is a victim of unlawful information activity."
The judge labelled the last-ditch move an "extremely optimistic application".
Andrew Green KC, who is representing Mirror Group Newspapers, agreed with the judge and said that evidence had been brought forward too late.
David Sherborne asked the judge to read the letter before weighing up whether or not it can be used as evidence.
However, Andrew Green said that it was an attempt to get evidence through the back door.
Prince Harry's David Sherborne asked the judge to read the letter before weighing up whether or not it can be used as evidence.
PA
Cameron concluded: "The judge made his decision and said I'm not going to entertain this any further. It's a letter to the court.
"There's an issue about privilege. It's wrong in principle. It wouldn't be fair on the defendants not to be able to question the journalist on its contents.
"This has been submitted 10 days after your evidence closed.
"I cannot entertain this at this late stage. I will not read the letter and I will not admit it as evidence."