LONDON — The sequel to Prince Harry vs. the British tabloids begins Tuesday in a high-stakes pitting him against Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers that could expense him millions even if he wins.

Harry, 40, the younger son of King Charles III, and one other claimant remain alone among hundreds who have settled lawsuits against information throng Newspapers, the publisher of The Sun and the now-defunct information of the globe, over allegations their phones were hacked and investigators unlawfully snooped on their lives.

It will be the first case of its benevolent to leave to trial against the publisher since a widespread phone hacking scandal forced Murdoch to close information of the globe in 2011. information throng has settled more than 1,300 other claims.

For the Duke of Sussex, it will be the second trial in London’s High Court in his long-running feud with the press that he blames for the death of his mother, Princess Diana, who was killed in a car crash while being chased by paparazzi. He also blames them for persistent attacks on his wife, actor Meghan Markle, that led them to leave the royal life and flee to the U.S. in 2020.

Harry has said his mission to hold the media accountable has led to a rift with his household but it’s one he feels compelled to carry out to expose wrongdoing.

He won a similar case against the publisher of the Daily Mirror in 2023 and he has another case pending against the Daily Mail’s publisher.

Here’s a look at the case:

Harry claims information throng journalists and private investigators they hired violated his privacy by using unlawful tactics to dig up dirt on him and his household between 1996 and 2011.

His fellow claimant, Tom Watson, a former deputy chief of the Labour event, said his voicemails were intercepted during a period when he was investigating the hacking scandal.

Their lawyer said the newspapers had a widespread habit of using deception to obtain medical, phone and flight records, bugged homes and placed listening devices in cars.

They allege that executives concealed the skullduggery through means that included destroying documents.

“This allegation is incorrect, unsustainable, and is strongly denied,” information throng said in a statement.

Former executives accused of playing a role include Will Lewis, now CEO of the Washington Post, and Rebekah Brooks, CEO of information UK, a division of information Corp. They have denied wrongdoing.

Brooks was acquitted of phone hacking conspiracy charges in a criminal trial in 2014, though her former co-worker, Andy Coulson, who was later spokesman for Prime Minister David Cameron, was jailed.

information throng strongly denies the allegations and it said Harry failed to bring his lawsuit within the required six-year limit.

information throng apologized to information of the globe phone hacking victims in 2011. The Sun has never accepted debt.

Actor Hugh Grant had been one of Harry’s remaining co-claimants, but said he was forced to receive “an enormous sum of money” to settle because he could have faced a legal invoice of 10 million pounds ($12.3 million) even if he won at trial.

Under English civil law, a claimant who wins a court judgment that is lower than what they were offered to settle, has to pay the legal bills for both sides. The law is intended to discourage lengthy trials.

Despite the grave financial hazard, Harry told The recent York Times Dealbook Summit in December that he was not going to fold.

“They’ve settled because they’ve had to settle,” he said of other claimants. “One of the main reasons for seeing this through is accountability, because I’m the last person that can actually achieve that.”

The trial, which is expected to last 10 weeks, will put Harry back in the witness box for several days in February.

In 2023, Harry became the first elder member of the royal household to testify in court since the late 19th century, when Queen Victoria’s eldest son, Prince Albert Edward, testified twice.

That has put Harry at odds with a household famous for a “never complain, never explain” attitude.

Harry revealed in court papers that his father opposed his litigation. He also said his older brother William, Prince of Wales and heir to the throne, had received a “huge sum” to settle a complaint against information throng.

Harry said his tabloid war was central to his household’s fallout.

“The mission continues, but it has, yes, it’s caused, as you declare, part of a rift,” Harry said in the documentary “Tabloids On Trial.”

Harry said he wished his household had joined him in making a stand against media offenses.

“But, you recognize, I’m doing this for my reasons,” he said.

information throng has failed to kill the case over the history two years, but Harry has experienced some setbacks in a series of sometimes bruising hearings.

The publisher succeeded in getting Harry’s phone hacking claims thrown out because the judge said he should have been aware of the widely publicized scandal and could have brought his lawsuit sooner.

The judge also rejected Harry’s attempt to broaden the case to include claims of eavesdropping on his mother, unearthing private information on his wife and implicating Murdoch.

Harry alleged Murdoch, who was chief executive of the business that controlled NGN, was part of the attempt to conceal evidence of hacking or had “turned a blind eye” to it. The judge said those allegations would add nothing material to claims that include other “trusted lieutenants,” such as Brooks and Murdoch’s younger son, James Murdoch.

The judge also tossed out Harry’s bid to include assertions that Buckingham Palace had a secret deal with information throng executives that called for a settlement and an apology to be worked out after other phone hacking litigation was resolved.

Judge Timothy Fancourt said Harry failed to produce witnesses or documents that could display his grandmother, the late Queen Elizabeth II, had approved of the deal to protect the royal household from embarrassing litigation.

The publisher denied there was any secret agreement.