Today's judgment finds that, in respect of the small number of articles which formed the basis of claims against the Mail's publisher ANL, the claimants had not done enough to prove that unlawful means were relied upon to source the stories.

The fact that the articles were deeply intrusive, and in some cases sexist and homophobic, was not in dispute in the case.

Commenting, Hacked Off Board Director and victim of phone hacking Jacqui Hames said,

“The stories and conduct which formed the basis for the claims against the Mail were devastatingly intrusive, and included medical details, information about children, and other deeply invasive behaviour and coverage.

"The Mail’s conduct fell well short of professional standards in the press, yet nothing has changed in the last twenty years and news publishers like the Mail still remain outside any independent form of regulation.  Action to address standards in the press is long overdue, and must be a priority for the incoming administration.

“The courts are not the appropriate vehicle for investigating the allegations of wrongdoing against the Mail in their fulness, and the judgment was clear in stating that, focusing on a handful of individual articles, the Court had not made findings on whether illegality was widespread at the Mail.

“Now only a public inquiry can get to the bottom of what really happened. Leveson Part Two must proceed without further delay.”

Spokespeople are available for comment.