Prince Harry won his phone hacking lawsuit Friday against the publisher of the Daily Mirror and was awarded over £140,000 ($180,000) in the first of his several lawsuits against the tabloids to go to trial.

Justice Timothy Fancourt in the High Court found that phone hacking was "widespread and habitual" at Mirror Group Newspapers over many years and private investigators "were an integral part of the system" to gather information unlawfully. He said executives at the papers were aware of the practice and covered it up. Fancourt found that 15 of the 33 newspaper articles in question at trial had been compiled with the help of unlawful means.

The judge also added damages for the distress the duke suffered and a further sum for aggravated damages to "reflect the particular hurt and sense of outrage" over the fact that two directors at Trinity Mirror knew about the activity and didn't stop it.

"Instead of doing so, they turned a blind eye to what was going on and positively concealed it," Fancourt said. "Had the illegal conduct been stopped, the misuse of the duke’s private information would have ended much sooner."

The Duke of Sussex had sought £440,000 ($560,000) as part of his crusade against the British media as he bucked his family's longstanding aversion to litigation by becoming the first senior member of the royal family to testify in court in over a century .

The appearance of Harry, the estranged younger son of King Charles III, in the witness box over two days in June created a spectacle as he lobbed allegations that Mirror Group Newspapers had employed journalists who eavesdropped on voicemails and hired private investigators to use deception and unlawful means to learn about him and other family members.

"I believe that phone hacking was at an industrial scale across at least three of the papers at the time," he asserted in the High Court. "That is beyond any doubt."

The judge said that Harry had a tendency in his testimony "to assume that everything published was the product of voicemail interception," which was not the case. He said the Mirror Group was "not responsible for all of the unlawful activity directed at the duke."