The Duke of Sussex testified that upon realising she worked as a journalist, ‘he had words’ with his friend ‘and that was that’

Facebook messages exchanged between Prince Harry and a Mail on Sunday journalist have emerged during his High Court privacy battle against Associated Newspapers Limited, revealing a warmer relationship than the Duke of Sussex previously acknowledged.

The correspondence, spanning December 2011 to January 2012, shows the Duke communicating with Charlotte Griffiths in familiar, affectionate terms.

During his January court appearance, Prince Harry stated he had encountered Ms Griffiths on just one occasion at a social gathering and severed contact the following day upon discovering her profession as a journalist.

However, the newly disclosed messages suggest the pair maintained friendly exchanges over several weeks following their initial meeting at a party hosted by a mutual acquaintance.

Facebook messages exchanged between Prince Harry and a Mail on Sunday journalist have emerged during his High Court privacy battle against Associated Newspapers Limited, revealing a warmer relationship than the Duke of Sussex previously acknowledged.

 | GETTY

Throughout their exchanges, the royal addressed Ms Griffiths with pet names including “sugar” and concluded messages with “mwah” alongside multiple kisses.

In one January 2012 message, Prince Harry expressed regret at missing a gathering, writing: “I WISH I was there sugar but unfortunately stuck in Cornwall doing Army stuff 🙁 Otherwise I would have been there playing and then drinking u under the table,obvi!!”

He also told the journalist: “Miss our movie snuggles!! I’m off comms all week incase u think I’m being rude,keep me posted xxx xxx xxx”.

The Duke initiated contact on December 4 2011, identifying himself to Ms Griffiths with the message: “It’s H,incase u were confused by name and picture!!! X.”

Following what appeared to be a weekend gathering, he described the event as “without doubt the best of those weekends I’ve been to”, adding that he had “never laughed so much in 24hrs”.

Prince Harry testified that upon realising she worked as a journalist, he “had words” with his friend “and that was that”.

 | GETTY

When providing evidence to the court, the Duke of Sussex maintained that he was unaware whether Ms Griffiths moved within his social circles and insisted that their sole encounter occurred at the party arranged by their shared friend, Arthur Landon.

Prince Harry testified that upon realising she worked as a journalist, he “had words” with his friend “and that was that”.

However, more than ten days after their initial exchange, on December 15, the Duke of Sussex informed Ms Griffiths she had “missed a good party last night”.

The following month, on January 22 2012, Ms Griffiths messaged him using the nickname “H Bomb” and noted: “We missed you so much at Arthur’s last week.”

Ms Griffiths, now 40 and serving as the paper’s editor at large, previously held the position of deputy diary editor at the Mail on Sunday during her exchanges with the Duke of Sussex.

The Duke initiated contact on December 4 2011, identifying himself to Ms Griffiths with the message: “It’s H,incase u were confused by name and picture!!! X.”

 | GETTY

In her March testimony, she explained that she had socialised within some of the same circles as the younger members of the Royal Family.

According to her account, Prince Harry added her as a friend on Facebook in 2011 and subsequently shared his mobile telephone number before their online messaging began.

The pair both attended an all-night gathering hosted by Mr Landon in June 2012, which Ms Griffiths recalled because they found it “quite funny” that the Duke of Sussex had remained awake throughout before attending Trooping the Colour later that morning.

The 11-week trial concluded on Tuesday, with legal representatives for both sides presenting closing written submissions totalling 392,164 words to Mr Justice Nicklin.

Antony White KC, representing Associated Newspapers, criticised what he termed the “speculative nature” of the claim and described allegations made against “respectable journalists” as “frankly desperate”.

The privacy action has been brought by seven prominent individuals, among them Sir Elton John and Baroness Lawrence.

David Sherborne, acting for the claimants, argued that each of his clients deserved a “very substantial award of damages”.

Mr Justice Nicklin indicated he would be working on the judgment full-time following the Easter period, though he offered no timeline for when his ruling might be delivered. Judgment in the case remains reserved.