The Duke of Sussex has settled for an undisclosed figure with the publisher of the Mirror over the remainder of his phone-hacking claims.
It comes after he was previously awarded a six-figure sum in damages in his High Court battle that alleged 148 stories from 1996 to 2010, published by Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) titles, used information obtained through unlawful means, including phone hacking.
Some 33 articles, dated between 1996 and 2009, were selected for examination by both sides during the trial of Harry’s contested claim against MGN.
In December's judgment, Mr Justice Fancourt found in Harry’s favour over 15 out of the 33 articles and awarded the duke a total of £140,600 in damages, including a sum of £20,000 “for the contribution that MGN’s conduct made to the cumulative and lasting damage to the duke’s wellbeing”.
The articles found to have involved unlawful information gathering cover the duke’s relationship with his family and ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy, his military service and allegations of drug use.
The further 115 articles in his claim, which may have been the subject to another trial, have been settled for “a substantial additional sum by way of damages” as well as his legal costs, his lawyer confirmed.
Here, ITV News takes a look at all of the 15 articles which the Prince was awarded damages for.
'Harry took drugs' and 'Cool it Harry' - published by the Sunday Mirror (January 13, 2002)
Both articles reported on allegations that Harry had been taking drugs with friends at the Rattlebone Inn, Wiltshire.
The Duke said his solicitors showed him a "series of invoices relating to my Associate, and close friend, Guy Pelly, as well as people connected to the running of the Rattlebone Inn itself, that were commissioned by the Sunday Mirror at this time, presumably to try and find out more about the time Guy and I spent together at Rattlebone, and whether there had been any repercussions for him".
He added: "The fact that the Defendant's journalists were trying to drag some of my friends into this and name and shame them sickens me."
Mr Justice Fancourt awarded Harry £6500 in damages for invasion of his privacy, and a further £500 for distress.
'Wills.. Seeing Burrell is the only way to stop him selling more Diana secrets Harry No.. Burrell's a..' - published by the Sunday People (December 28, 2003)
The article revealed details about a private disagreement between Harry and William in relation to a proposed meeting with Diana's former butler, Paul Burrell.
The Duke said he has "no idea how the Defendant's journalists obtained the information within the article".
"A 'senior Royal source' is quoted within the article, reflecting my exact private feelings including that I was 'dead against any meeting' and that a meeting would be 'pandering to Burrell's attention-seeking and self-interest'," he added.
"I also would have used the phrase 'two-face s***', as is reported and believe this could have been lifted directly from a voicemail I had left."
Mr Justice Fancourt said it was “probable” that the information was obtained by the hacking of messages between Harry and his brother William, now the Prince of Wales, or other associates.
The judge awarded Harry a total of £12,000 in damages for this article.
'Harry is a Chelsy fan' - published by the Daily Mirror (November 29, 2004)
The article features a large photograph of Chelsy Davy, who would become a long-term partner of Harry's.
Reportage from the article also said that Harry had spent time with Ms Davy when he was in Argentina, something which the Duke said he found to be "really interesting as he "actually had no idea that Chelsy was going to be joining me in Lobos [city in Argentina]".
Harry said instead that his close friend, Mark Dyer, had "made arrangements with Chelsy, over the phone, by voicemail and text message, for her to come and surprise me".
"No one else knew of the plan, so I can't understand how any of the media had known where we were, or who she was," he added.
The duke was awarded £2,000 in damages for a breach of his privacy and a further £1000 for distress.
'When Harry met daddy.. the biggest danger to wildlife in Africa' - published by the Daily Mirror (December 13, 2004)
The article revealed details of Harry meeting Ms Davy's family for the first time, revealing specific information about the trip itinerary.
Harry said: "I am at a complete loss as to how these details were obtained. As I have said previously, details of my travel plans, including dates I would be flying, were not released by the Palace for security reasons, yet the specific date I would return to Britain was published days in advance."
He continued: "What's clear to me is that the Defendant's journalists knew far more than they put into the public domain and didn't want to reveal too much of their hand for fear of exposing the unlawful ways they were really obtaining this kind of personal and private information."
Mr Justice Fancourt awarded Harry £2000 in damages.
'Harry's girl 'To dump him'' and 'Chelsy is not happy' - published by the Daily Mirror (January 15, 2005)
The articles reported that Harry was "about to be dumped" by Ms Davy, following allegations that the Duke had been flirting with another woman at a fancy dress party.
Harry said: "The article contains several quotes from 'friends' or other 'partygoers', but the details about our [Harry and Ms Davy] telephone communications are not attributed to anyone, so how could the Defendant's journalists know about this."
According to the Duke, he was shown call data from his solicitors of calls made by MGN journalists to his associate Mr Pelly.
"The duration of the call was 'null' and I have been told that this is indicative to hacking as it could be the first limb of a 'double tap' call," he added.
"It seems obvious to me that the Defendant's journalists were digging round my Associates to gain private information about me."
Harry was awarded £5000 in damages for invasion of privacy, with £1500 awarded for distress.
'Chelsy's gap eiir' - published by the Sunday People (April 24, 2005)
The article reported that Ms Davy would take a year out from her studies to be able to spend more time in England, and includes a quote from an "insider", which states that Harry was "spending hours on the phone to Chelsy".
The Duke said he found the "level of detail in this article so disturbing", adding he does not believe Ms Davy would leak information to the press as she had "no interest in being involved in public life".
Harry said: "Who is this unidentified insider that is quoted? It seems to me that they must have obtained copies of our phone records and just seen the volume and length of our calls."
He awarded Harry a total of £6000 in damages.
'Chel shocked' - published by the Sunday People (April 9 2006)
The article reported that Ms Davy "blew her top" after Harry had been on a night out with cadets from Sandhurst and visited Spearmint Rhino - a chain of strip clubs.
Reportage from the article includes details about a series of phone calls between Harry and Ms Davy, and a comment from a "highly placed source" that she had gone "berserk".
Harry said: "The detail about the timing and length of the calls is so specific. With hindsight, it seems likely to me that the Defendant's journalists had access to one of our phone records and put two and two together to make a story."Mr Justice Fancourt awarded Harry £4500 in privacy damages and £1500 for distress.
'Davy stated' - published by the Sunday People (September 16, 2007)
The article reported that Harry and Ms Davy's relationship was in crisis after a "string of bitter bust-ups".
According to the Sunday People, Harry and Ms Davy had three "monumental" rows, with a breakdown of the details of each of the purported rows.
Harry said: "I really cannot understand how the Defendant's journalists obtained such specific details for this article, however given what I know about Dean Rousewell's [article author] activities, I find it very suspicious. I certainly wasn't discussing our relationship in these kind of details with anyone inside the Palace."
Awarding Harry a total of £8,000 in damages, Mr Justice Fancourt said: “I conclude that, in the absence of some plausible explanation, this article was obtained by voicemail interception of the duke’s or Ms Davy’s or their associates’ telephones, and by obtaining telephone call data.”
'Er, ok if I drop you off here?' - published by the Sunday Mirror (December 2, 2007)
The article includes a large photograph of Ms Davy walking away from Harry's car in the grounds of Kensington Palace, claiming to be "proof" that the pair were back in a relationship.
Harry said: "When my solicitors showed me this article, I recognised the photograph immediately.
"It was taken through the archway that leads on to Kensington High Street, but still within the private road of Kensington Palace.
"There weren't routinely photographers waiting at this entrance, unless something big was happening.
"The reason I had dropped her off where I did was to avoid any members of the public seeing us by chance, so what are the chances of someone waiting at the archway, at the specific moment I dropped her off, with a camera ready?"
The High Court judge said that information about Ms Davy’s whereabouts “are likely to have been obtained by voicemail interception” and awarded Harry £4000 in damages.
'Soldier Harry's Taliban' - published by the Sunday People (September 28, 2008)
The article reported that Harry had been "banned" from returning to service in Afghanistan, as it would present an "unacceptable risk" to the Duke and his comrades, but that the possibility of serving in Iraq had not been ruled out.
Reportage from the article also included a quote from an unidentified "source" that said Harry was being let down gently because he believed there was a vital job to be done in Afghanistan.
Harry said that while the "Defendant's journalist was right to say I was desperate to get back", he believed that "articles like this did not help and it's not clear to me who the source would be that the Defendant quotes".
"Everyone I spoke to knew the importance of discretion, and that media reporting was the whole reason I had been withdrawn," he continued.
"I don't believe anyone who had the details contained within the articles would want to jeopardise my career by speaking about it, so I find this 'exclusive' article to be highly suspicious."
Harry was awarded £4,000 in damages.
'He just loves boozing & Army she is fed up & is heading home' - published by the Sunday Mirror (January 25, 2009)
The article reported that Ms Davy had ended her relationship with Harry because he "loved the Army more than her".
The reportage also revealed that the couple had "several tense meetings" the week before, and it included a comment from a "friend" that the final straw had been Harry "signing up to a helicopter pilot training course, as it would leave so little time for a serious relationship".
Harry also said he has been shown call data to Ms Davy's mobile, where three calls to journalists had been made, which he described as "violating".
Awarding Harry £7,000 in damages over the article, the judge said: “In this frenzied atmosphere of trying to find out about the breakdown of the relationship, I have little doubt that the newspapers were trying everything they could to get more information.”
'Harry's date with Gladiator's star' - published by the Sunday People (April 19, 2009)
The article showed photographs of Harry with presenter Caroline Flack, together on a street in Fulham, London.
The pictures were published alongside an article detailing how the pair had "joined four friends for a lively dinner party".
Harry said he remembered the night as he recognised the photographers, who he described as "highly suspicious, and often dangerous", and said they had been "hiding underneath a car".
Harry said only himself, Caroline, and the friend whose apartment it was - Mark 'Marko' Dyer - had known about the planned meeting.
"Marko and I had exchanged voicemails about the night... Given the fact only the three of us knew the plan, I was highly suspicious and convinced someone had leaked the information to the press," Harry said.
The judge awarded Harry £7,500 for breach of privacy and a further £7,500 for “considerable distress”.
'Chelsy's new fella' - published by the Sunday People (April 26 2009)
The article alleged that Harry had been "bombarding" his ex-girlfriend with calls and "begged" her to take him back, despite her telling him she was in a new relationship.
Harry said the report also included a quote from an unidentified "close pal" of Ms Davy's, but said this felt "very suspicious to me" as the former couple had been "guarded" with who they shared information about their private lives.
However, Mr Justice Fancourt said: “The most probable explanation is that The People had obtained call data or access to voicemails, or both.”
The duke was awarded £4,250 in damages.
Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To Know...