Doreen Lawrence will not foot any of legal bill for failed attempt to sue Daily Mail

Doreen Lawrence, the social justice campaigner, will not foot any of a multimillion-pound bill for the failed attempt to sue the publisher of the Daily Mail, the Guardian understands.Lawrence, the mother of the murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, whose case was the subject of a long-running Daily Mail campaign from the late 1990s, was one of seven claimants defeated in court over claims the Mail titles used unlawful methods to source stories.The High Court dismissed all the claims brought by the Duke of Sussex, Lawrence and others, who had made allegations of bugging, landline tapping, phone hacking and “blagging” private information.Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL), the publisher of the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday and Mail Online, has already said it will seek to recover its significant costs from defending the legal action.The scene is now set for a battle over the costs of the case. Estimates have been put at as much as £50m by Mail figures, though other sources close to the case said the real costs could be a small fraction of that amount, following previous court rulings.However, it is understood that whatever the outcome, Lawrence, who was convinced to join the legal action by Prince Harry and his legal team, will not have to pay any share of the costs of the failed case.“Nobody, least of all the duke, who is very protective over Doreen, is going to see her out of pocket,” said a source familiar with the matter.Hearings later this month will begin to hammer out the costs of the case.Insurance was taken out to cover the claimants and their lawyers in the event of losing the action. The court approved budgets of £4.1m for the claimants and £4.4m for ANL, which would be covered by the insurance.The judge, Mr Justice Nicklin, could, however, rule that the claimants’ team should pay more of ANL’s bill. The Times also reported it was possible the claimants’ insurer could challenge their policy, but there is no suggestion it wishes to do so.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLawrence was initially alerted to the case by a personal email from Harry. In written testimony submitted to the trial, Lawrence said the duke told her that some information “had come to light and that it was something I would want to know about”.She then met Anjlee Sangani, a solicitor involved in the case, and David Sherborne, the lead barrister for the claimants, at the Corinthia hotel in London. They told her that information had “accidentally surfaced” in a conversation between two private investigators.During the actual trial, that alleged conversation did not feature.Lawrence was told at the Corinthia meeting that a private investigator had been asked to monitor her phone bills and bank accounts, as well as her private communications. ANL always denied any wrongdoing.Five Mail stories relating to Lawrence were part of the case. Nicklin ruled the claimants’ legal team had failed to prove any of them involved unlawful information gathering.He made the same finding for all 55 stories cited by the claimants in the case, as he did with three other alleged incidents that did not lead to published stories.In evidence during the trial, the former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre said Lawrence’s involvement in the legal action was “bitterly wounding”, given his paper’s campaign to bring her son’s killers to justice.The claimants, who also included Elton John and his partner, David Furnish, the actors Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost, and the former Lib Dem minister Simon Hughes, will also have to hold talks to decide whether to appeal against what was a comprehensive win for the Mail titles.