Bosoka
VIP Memeber
- Posts
- 358
- Posts Power
- 358.0%
- Liked
- 2
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2024
Prince Harry has lost his legal challenge against the U.K. government's decision to downgrade his security protection.
The 39-year-old royal's lawyers had argued that he had been "singled out" and treated "less favourably" over a decision to change the level of his personal protective security in the U.K. after he stopped being a working royal.
Retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane issued his ruling on Wednesday morning. He declared that the decision to downgrade Harry's security status was not unlawful or "irrational" and that there had been no "procedural unfairness".
"Even if such procedural unfairness occurred, the court would in any event be prevented from granting the claimant (Prince Harry) relief," he ruled, according to Sky News. "This is because, leaving aside any such unlawfulness, it is highly likely that the outcome for the claimant would not have been substantially different."
The court hearings were held in private in December without the presence of Harry, who lives in California with his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and their two children.
He launched the legal action against the U.K. Home Office in 2020 after the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) decided that his level of state security should be "bespoke" and considered on a "case-by-case" basis when he visits his homeland.
Last year, the Duke of Sussex lost a legal bid to allow him to privately pay for police protection during his U.K. visits.
The 39-year-old royal's lawyers had argued that he had been "singled out" and treated "less favourably" over a decision to change the level of his personal protective security in the U.K. after he stopped being a working royal.
Retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane issued his ruling on Wednesday morning. He declared that the decision to downgrade Harry's security status was not unlawful or "irrational" and that there had been no "procedural unfairness".
"Even if such procedural unfairness occurred, the court would in any event be prevented from granting the claimant (Prince Harry) relief," he ruled, according to Sky News. "This is because, leaving aside any such unlawfulness, it is highly likely that the outcome for the claimant would not have been substantially different."
The court hearings were held in private in December without the presence of Harry, who lives in California with his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and their two children.
He launched the legal action against the U.K. Home Office in 2020 after the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) decided that his level of state security should be "bespoke" and considered on a "case-by-case" basis when he visits his homeland.
Last year, the Duke of Sussex lost a legal bid to allow him to privately pay for police protection during his U.K. visits.