Prince Harry wins permission to appeal against police protection ruling

Prince Harry has won permission to appeal against a High Court ruling over his security arrangements.

The Duke of Sussex had sought a judicial review of the decision to remove his right to automatic police protection when he moved abroad.

But in February, he “comprehensively lost” what Mr Justice Lane later called a “frankly hopeless” bid to appeal his case against the Home Office.

The claim was dismissed after two-and-a-half years of legal wrangling.

The judge insisted that the decision made by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) had not been irrational or procedurally unfair.

However, the Duke lodged an application to appeal and on Thursday secured what he is understood to consider a “significant” legal victory, as the Court of Appeal granted him leave to challenge the judgment.

The court concluded that there was a “real prospect of success” in the Duke’s argument that Ravec should have followed its own written policy.

It found Mr Justice Lane may have erred in concluding the Duke was not in a comparable position to those in an “Other VIP Category” who receive state security.

A crucial step

The decision marks a crucial step in the Duke’s ongoing legal battle to ensure the safety of his family whilst in the UK.

He believes that he is currently unable to bring his wife, Meghan, or their two children, Prince Archie, five, and Princess Lilibet, three, to the UK.

The Duke’s legal team is understood to have asked the court to expedite the case due to fears of an increased risk to the Duke, including threats against him made by Al Qaeda.

The February ruling is also feared to have impacted the approach other countries take to his security and comes ahead of multiple foreign tours planned by the Sussexes.

The Telegraph revealed last month that the Duke had turned down an invitation from his father to stay at Buckingham Palace because of security concerns.

Royal residences are among the best protected properties in the country, with armed officers stationed at the gates.

However, he opted instead to stay at a hotel when he visited in May so he could come and go unseen.

The litigation has already left him with an estimated legal bill of more than £1 million.

The Duke applied for a judicial review after Ravec declared in February 2020 that he and his family were no longer entitled to the “same degree” of personal security when visiting Britain.

Instead, the committee created a “bespoke” approach that involved assessing each visit on its merits but which has resulted in the Duke being denied police protection on each subsequent return to the UK.

His legal challenge was based on an alleged lack of transparency about Ravec’s composition and processes, as he argued that he had been denied a “clear and full explanation” of the composition of Ravec and how it operates.

He also argued that he had been “singled out” and treated “less favourably” than others by Ravec, which had subjected him to “unlawful and unfair treatment”.

Shaheed Fatima KC, his lawyer, said the committee had also failed to consider the potential “impact on the UK’s reputation” of a successful attack on the Duke, “bearing in mind his status, background and profile within the Royal family”.

The Duke believed he faced a greater risk than his late mother Diana, Princess of Wales, with “additional layers of racism and extremism”.

In a letter he sent to Sir Mark Sedwill, then Cabinet Secretary, he also expressed “disbelief” over his security arrangements.