Prince Harry set to 'seek permission' to challenge judge's decision after suffering fresh blow

Prince Harry set to 'seek permission' to challenge judge's decision after suffering fresh blow

WATCH NOW: Duke of Sussex tried to appeal High Court ruling

GB News
Dorothy Reddin

By Dorothy Reddin

Published: 15/04/2024

- 18:34

Updated: 15/04/2024

- 19:23

The Duke of Sussex was refused permission to appeal a court ruling

  • Prince Harry suffered defeat in his High Court battle with the Home Office in February
  • He initially tried to appeal the court verdict but was refused permission
  • The Duke of Sussex is set to "seek permission" to challenge Mr Justice Lane's decision

Prince Harry is set to "seek permission" to challenge a judge's decision after suffering a fresh blow.

In February, the Duke of Sussex suffered defeat in his High Court battle with the Home Office.

Harry, 39, was fighting a 2020 decision by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) that he should receive a different degree of protection when in the UK.

The duke subsequently tried to appeal the court's decision. Earlier today, the Duke of Sussex’s initial bid to bring an appeal was refused.

\u200bPrince Harry

Prince Harry set to challenge judge's decision


In a statement, Prince Harry's lawyers have said: "The Duke of Sussex will be seeking permission from the Court of Appeal to challenge the decision of Mr Justice Lane."

Ravec’s initial decision came as a result of a change in the duke’s “status” after he stopped being a “full-time working member of the royal family”, a judge was told.

In a judgment in February, retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane rejected the duke’s case and concluded Ravec’s approach was not irrational.

Following the previous ruling, a spokesperson for the duke said he intended to challenge the judgment, adding that Harry “hopes he will obtain justice from the Court of Appeal”.

Prince HarryHarry launched legal action against the Home Office following a 2020 decision by RavecPA

Today, a judicial spokesperson said that Harry had lost his initial bid to appeal against the decision.

In the initial decision to refuse the duke, Sir Peter said Harry’s appeal bid was “largely a recapitulation of the case advanced by the claimant at trial”.

He continued: “The reality of the matter is that the claimant considers he should receive a different approach to his protection whilst in the UK than Ravec decided he should, based in part on his comparison of his own position with that of others. Ravec, as an expert body, concluded otherwise. It was entitled to do so.”

However, the duke is still able to ask the Court of Appeal directly for the green light to bring an appeal.

Prince Harry

Prince Harry has been refused permission to appeal the verdict


Separately, Harry has been ordered to pay 90 per cent of the Home Office’s legal costs of defending his challenge.

Sir Peter said that Harry should pay most of the Home Office’s legal costs, but added the government department had committed “breaches” during the legal battle which were “sanctionable”.

He continued: “They have resulted in the case being largely contested by reference to new grounds, which have not been subjected to the normal permission process.

"The breaches resulted from misapprehensions on the part of the defendant as to the duty of disclosure, which this decision has had to address at some length. It is, therefore, right that there should be a modest but still significant reduction in the award of costs to the defendant.”


Prince Harry

Prince Harry previously vowed to appeal the High Court's verdict


The retired judge said the costs to be paid should be reduced by 10 per cent, rejecting an argument from Harry’s lawyers that it should be reduced by at least 50 per cent.

Sir Peter said: “There is no merit in this ‘partial success’ submission … The fact that the court did not accept each and every submission of the defendant as to the path to take towards dismissal of the claim does not alter the fact that the claimant comprehensively lost.”

The judge said Harry’s lawyers had taken “an inappropriate, formalist interpretation of the Ravec process”.

He added: “The ‘bespoke’ process devised for the claimant in the decision of February 28 2020 was, and is, legally sound.”

You may like