Coulson had sued News International subsidiary News Group Newspapers (NGN) over a clause in his severance agreement following his resignation in July.
The 43-year-old quit the News of the World to become David Cameron's communications chief, but left the role earlier in the year after revelations started emerging about hacking at the now defunct Sunday tabloid.
He had asked the court for a declaration that NGN, which stopped paying his legal costs in August, should pay "the professional costs and expenses properly incurred" while he defends himself against "allegations of criminal conduct".
Coulson, who was arrested and bailed in July in the police investigation into the hacking affair, has always denied any knowledge or involvement in the hacking affair.
Christopher Jeans QC, the lawyer representing NGN, said that the clause in his severance deal covered the "occupational hazards of being an editor", and not any alleged criminal activity.
Justice Supperstone accepted the argument and said that NGN is not liable to pay Coulson's legal costs.
In his judgement, the judge said: "Clause 4.6 of the agreement [between NGN and Coulson] does not cover the criminal allegations made against Mr Coulson personally.
"If, contrary to my view, the criminal allegations are covered, no proceedings have commenced. For the reasons I give above, this claim fails."
Also today, private investigator Glenn Mulcaire has won his battle at the High Court to get NGN to cover his legal fees.
Mulcaire, who was jailed for six months in 2007 for intercepting voicemails of members of the royal household, had sued NGN for breach of contract.
As he is currently facing various civil law suits and was arrested again last month in the police phone hacking probe, Mulcaire argued that he cannot fund his legal defence, or cover any damages incurred.
Justice Sir Andrew Morritt said that NGN, which employed the private investigator until he was jailed, had "no right" to cancel his legal fees.
In a written judgment, the chancellor of the high court said that Mulcaire's contract of indemnity is still valid.
"A valid contract of indemnity was concluded between NGN and Mr Mulcaire on the terms of the indemnity letter; such contract has not been determined and is still subsisting," he said.
"Such contract was not determinable at will by NGN whether or not on notice."
Mulcaire was also not in the High Court to hear the verdict.