Prince Harry may appeal High Court defeat on personal safety grounds

The Duke of Sussex has been granted permission to appeal the rejection of his High Court challenge to a decision to change the level of his personal security during his visit to the UK.

Prince Harry took legal action against the Home Office following the February 2020 decision by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) that he should be given a different degree of protection funded by taxpayers while in the country.

In a judgment delivered in February, retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane rejected the Duke’s case and concluded that Ravec’s approach was neither irrational nor procedurally unfair.

However, Harry has been given the green light to challenge Sir Peter’s decision in the Court of Appeal, according to an order from Lord Justice Bean dated May 23.

In his partially redacted 52-page ruling rejecting the Duke’s application, Sir Peter said Harry’s lawyers had adopted “an inappropriate and formalistic interpretation of the Ravec process”.

He added: “The “tailor-made” procedure designed for the applicant in the decision of February 28, 2020 was and is legally sound.

The judge said he accepted comments from Sir Richard Mottram, the former chairman of Ravec, who said that, although he had received a document setting out Harry’s full legal arguments in February 2020, “I would have made the same decision for materially the same reasons.

Read next

Ravec delegated responsibility for providing security measures for members of the royal family and others to the Home Office, with involvement from the Metropolitan Police Service, the Cabinet Office and the Royal Household.

After this year’s ruling, a legal spokesperson for Harry said he intended to appeal, adding: “The Duke is not seeking preferential treatment, but a fair and legal application of Ravec’s own rules , ensuring that he receives the same consideration as others. in accordance with Ravec’s own written policy.

“In February 2020, Ravec failed to apply its written policy to the Duke of Sussex and excluded him from a particular risk analysis.

“The Duke’s case is that the so-called ‘bespoke process’ which applies to him cannot replace this risk analysis.

“The Duke of Sussex hopes to obtain justice from the Court of Appeal and is making no further comment while the case is ongoing.”

Additional reporting from Press Association