Sadie Frost Testifies In High Court Privacy Case

On a chilly January morning in London, the High Court became the stage for a dramatic and deeply personal legal battle, as actor and director Sadie Frost took the stand in her lawsuit against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), the publisher of the Daily Mail. Frost, 60, is among a high-profile group of claimants—including Prince Harry, Sir Elton John, Baroness Doreen Lawrence, and Liz Hurley—alleging that the publisher engaged in years of unlawful information gathering, including phone hacking, bugging, and the use of private investigators, to fuel tabloid stories that upended their personal lives.

Frost’s testimony, delivered on January 26, 2026, was raw and emotional. She described feeling as though there was a “price on my head,” with the Daily Mail and its journalists relentlessly pursuing details of her private life. “There was obviously a price on my head. The Daily Mail had said they were interested in Sadie Frost,” she told the court, her voice breaking at times, according to Reuters. The case centers on 11 articles published about Frost between 2000 and 2010, many of which related to her turbulent divorce from actor Jude Law, as well as two separate episodes of alleged unlawful information gathering that never resulted in published stories—including one involving her ectopic pregnancy.

The depth of intrusion became clear as Frost recounted specific incidents. She told the court she knew “100%” that certain articles were based on information hacked from her voicemails. “One thing about voicemails is you have to choose your words quite carefully,” she explained, according to The Independent. “I would be very precise about what I was saying. That’s how I knew a lot of the articles were about my voicemails to Jude [Law].” She described the pain of having her ex-husband suspect she was leaking stories to the press—an accusation that, she said, severely damaged their relationship and made co-parenting “very difficult.”

Frost’s suffering extended beyond her marriage. She broke down in tears as she recalled a 2002 incident reported in the press about her two-year-old daughter finding an ecstasy tablet at a Soho venue. “I wasn’t with any friends, I was isolated, holed up at home, distressed and trying to be a good mum,” she said in court, as quoted by The Independent. “This has been on my poor girl Iris’s life forever... it’s just so humiliating... it just made me so ill.” Frost revealed she needed hospital treatment for post-natal depression, an ordeal made worse by the media spotlight.

One of the most invasive episodes involved her ectopic pregnancy in 2003. Frost testified that the pregnancy was unplanned and known only to her partner at the time, Jackson Scott, and perhaps one close friend. Yet, details appeared in a draft article by Mail on Sunday journalist Katie Nicholl. Frost’s barrister, David Sherborne, argued in court that the only way such intimate information could have reached the press was through unlawful means—either by hacking voicemails or obtaining medical records. “How did they know she was treated unless they had access to her voicemail or medical records?” Sherborne asked, as reported by The Independent. Frost herself was “shocked and appalled” that her medical details had been accessed, telling the court, “Oh my goodness, never,” when asked if she could have been the source of the leak.

Frost’s sense of violation was compounded by the way journalists targeted her family. She called it “disgusting” that reporters contacted her father while he was in hospital and doorstepped her mother at home. In her witness statement, she described her landline as “a lifeline for me” and was “mortified” to learn it had been listened to. “The stories they wrote violated me, my friends and family, and my children who were still so small, and they made me believe that I could not trust anyone,” she said. She added, “I am so angry that Associated did this to me and thought it was okay to profit from someone going through so much pain without a thought for me or my children and the suffering they were causing me and us all.”

Throughout the proceedings, Frost firmly rejected the publisher’s suggestion that her family or friends were responsible for leaking information. “I don’t 100% agree with that,” she responded to ANL’s barrister Antony White KC, according to The Guardian. She insisted that when her family did speak to the media, it was only after stories had already been published, and that the most private details could only have come from hacking. She also denied trying to involve her close friend Kate Moss in the lawsuit, calling such claims “100% untrue.”

ANL, for its part, has strongly denied any wrongdoing and is mounting a robust defense. The publisher argues that Frost’s claims are “wholly without any foundation in the evidence before the court” and are “based entirely on spurious and/or discredited information.” ANL contends that the articles were “sourced entirely legitimately,” often from what it describes as a “leaky” circle of friends and family around Frost and Law during their high-profile divorce. The publisher also maintains that payments to private investigators were not linked to Frost’s pregnancy and that information was provided by a freelance journalist with confidential sources close to the actress. Furthermore, ANL asserts that Frost’s lawsuit is out of time, as she allegedly knew, or should have known, about her potential claim well before she filed it in October 2022.

The emotional toll of the trial has been evident, not just for Frost but for other claimants as well. Prince Harry, who also gave evidence, described the proceedings as a “recurring traumatic experience” and a “repeat of the past,” stating, “I have never believed that my life is open season to be commercialised by these people.” He added, “They continue to come after me, they have made my wife’s life an absolute misery, my Lord.” Both Harry and Hurley became emotional on the stand, underscoring the deep scars left by years of media intrusion.

As the trial continues before Mr Justice Nicklin, with a conclusion expected at the end of March 2026 and a judgment to follow, the case stands as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle between celebrity privacy and the relentless appetite of the tabloid press. Frost, for her part, remains resolute. “The Daily Mail should be accountable,” she told her lawyer. “They must be held accountable.”

With the High Court proceedings drawing to a close, all eyes are on the coming judgment—a decision that could have far-reaching implications for press conduct, privacy rights, and the boundaries of journalism in the UK.