

Prince Harry has suffered a significant legal defeat in his ongoing battle over UK government-funded security.
On May 2, 2025, the UK Court of Appeal unanimously upheld a previous decision that denied the Duke of Sussex’s request to reinstate taxpayer-funded police protection during his visits to the UK. This ruling marks a pivotal moment in the Duke’s legal challenges concerning his security arrangements.
Legal ruling: Security arrangements upheld
The Court of Appeal’s decision supports the stance of the Home Office and the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec), which oversees security provisions for high-profile individuals.
The court concluded that Ravec’s approach-providing “bespoke” security on a case-by-case basis for Prince Harry-was both lawful and reasonable. Lord Justice Geoffrey Vos emphasized that while the Duke’s concerns were heartfelt, they did not constitute valid legal grounds to overturn the existing arrangements.
“I concluded, having studied the detail of the extensive documentation, I could not say that the duke’s sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for the challenge to Ravec’s decision,” said Vos.
“The duke was in effect stepping in and out of the cohort of protection provided by Ravec. Outside the UK, he was outside the cohort, but when in the UK, his security would be considered as appropriate.”
The court found that Ravec’s decision was not irrational and acknowledged the unique circumstances surrounding Prince Harry’s status as a former working royal residing abroad.
This ruling follows a series of legal proceedings initiated by Prince Harry after he and his wife, Meghan Markle, stepped back from their senior royal roles in 2020. The couple’s decision to relocate to the United States led to changes in their security protocols, with Ravec determining that their protection should be assessed individually rather than as part of the broader royal cohort.
Implications and future considerations
The Court of Appeal’s judgment has significant implications for Prince Harry’s future visits to the UK. Without the reinstatement of taxpayer-funded security, the Duke and his family may face challenges in ensuring their safety during trips to his home country.
The ruling also sets a precedent for how security arrangements for former royals are determined, potentially influencing similar cases in the future.
While the court’s decision is a setback for Prince Harry, it underscores the complex balance between individual security needs and public resources. The Home Office has expressed satisfaction with the ruling, stating that the UK’s protective security system is both rigorous and proportionate.
However, the Duke’s legal team has indicated that they are considering further legal avenues, including a potential appeal to the UK Supreme Court.
As this legal saga continues, it highlights the ongoing tensions between the Duke of Sussex and the UK government regarding his security and status as a former member of the royal family. The outcome of any future appeals will likely have lasting effects on the Duke’s relationship with the monarchy and his ability to safely visit the UK with his family.
This news was originally published on this post .
Be the first to leave a comment