The former Duke of York previously claimed ‘everything blew up’ for his ex after her details were disclosed

Prince Harry’s ex-girlfriend’s identity “was given by staff” at an Argentine polo ranch, the High Court has heard.

The Duke of Sussex alleged a story published in the Mail on Sunday in 2004, which detailed that he was “besotted” with his former girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, must have been gathered illegally.

The former editor of the paper, Peter Wright, said one of the paper’s reporters, Caroline Graham, got the name from a manager at the ranch where the couple were staying.

He told the court: “I don’t believe any methods like phone hacking, landline tapping or sticky window microphones were used or that Caroline Graham would know how to do any of those things.

Chelsy Davy’s identity ‘was given by staff’ the High Court heard

 | GETTY

“My understanding was that Caroline was given Chelsy Davy’s name by staff at the ranch, with whom she or those working with her had a friendly relationship.”

Mr Wright said he had no memory of anyone approaching British Airways for the details and denied that any information had been “blagged”.

Harry’s claim in the trial against Associated Newspaper Limited (ANL) involves 14 articles published between 2001 and 2013.

He previously said that upon the publicity of Ms Davy’s name, “everything blew up and her life as she knew it was over”.

The Duke of Sussex’s ex-girlfriend is named multiple times in his claims against ANL

 | PA

The duke said in his witness statement: “I remember the whole area where we were staying being swarmed in photographers.

“However, despite feeling like I was under constant surveillance, I knew nothing of Associated’s unlawful acts that were directed at me and those around me.

“Clearly, much of what was happening to me and others around me was due to that.”

Giving evidence on Monday, Mr Wright explained that due to Harry’s position, he “was surrounded by a large number of staff, friends and hangers-on, many of whom briefed journalists, either directly, or by speaking indiscreetly to third parties”.

The trial is anticipated to run for approximately nine weeks

 | GETTY

He continued: “When an article quoted a ‘royal insider’ or a ‘palace source’ it was not a cover for so-called unlawful information gathering, but a simple statement of fact.

“I know that because at various points in my career I had just such royal sources myself and would share information they had given me with reporters, who would in turn attribute it to ‘a source’.”

The duke is among seven claimants suing ANL, alleging they were victims of blagging, phone hacking and other unlawful activity.

ANL has vigorously denied the claims.

The duke is among seven claimants suing ANL

 | GETTY

Harry was previously in the UK, giving evidence in the trial in January.

The legal action was initially lodged in October 2022, with numerous preparatory hearings taking place in the intervening period.

The trial, being heard by Mr Justice Nicklin, is expected to wrap up in March, with a written judgment to follow at a later date.