Prince Harry’s case against Home Office can proceed, high court judge rules

Judge grants permission for part of claim over duke’s security arrangements to have judicial review

The Duke of Sussex has won a bid to bring part of his high court claim against the Home Office over his security arrangements while in the UK.

Harry is bringing legal action over a decision not to allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family when they are in the UK. At a preliminary hearing last month his lawyers sought permission for a full judicial review of the Home Office decision.

He is challenging the February 2020 decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) after being told he would no longer be given the “same degree” of personal protection when visiting.

In a judgment on Friday, the high court judge Mr Justice Swift said the case could proceed, granting permission for part of Harry’s claim to have a judicial review.

The judge said: “The application for permission to apply for judicial review is allowed in part and refused in part.”

Sign up to First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every weekday morning at 7am BST

Harry is seeking to challenge the decision not to grant him automatic police protection whenever he is in the UK. His legal team argue that the security arrangements set out in a letter from Ravec, and their application when he visited the UK in June 2021, were invalid due to “procedural unfairness” because he was not given an opportunity to make “informed representations beforehand”.

Shaheed Fatima QC, for the duke, told the court earlier this month: “He didn’t know at that stage that the Royal household was involved at all ... he was told it was an independent decision.”

His lawyers had argued that the Queen’s private secretary Sir Edward Young should not have been involved in the decision to deny him police protection in the UK due to the “significant tensions” between them.

Lawyers for the Home Office argued Ravec was entitled to reach the decision it did, which is that Harry’s security arrangements would be considered on a “case by case” basis, and that permission for a full judicial review should be refused.

The judge ruled parts of four of the five grounds Harry claimed were “arguable” , which means there will now be a full high court hearing to review the duke’s claim.

The judge said it was arguable that Ravec’s decisions were legally unreasonable and the duke should have been told about Ravec’s policy before its decision in February 2020; and it was arguable whether the duke “should have had the opportunity to make representations direct to Ravec, including the opportunity to comment on other matters Ravec considered”.

However, the judge denied permission for other parts of Harry’s claim, including that he should have been told who the members of Ravec were and that he did not have the chance to discuss the “appropriateness” of some people being involved in the committee.

The judge said: “In the course of submissions, it became apparent that, while the claimant may have had disagreements with persons who were Ravec committee members, there was no evidence at all to support a claim that any committee member had approached decisions with a closed mind, or that either decision was affected by bias.” He added: “Ultimately it was accepted for the claimant that no such case was, or could be, advanced.”

The judge added that the Home Office was “yet to have the chance to address in evidence” the process by which Ravec took its decision and this “should be considered at a final hearing”.

Contributor

Caroline Davies

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Article image
Prince Harry begins second legal case against Home Office over personal security
Lawyers claim royal should be allowed to challenge decision preventing him from paying for police protection

Caroline Davies

16, May, 2023 @1:54 PM

Article image
Has time run out for Prince Harry’s case against Murdoch press?
Duke of Sussex may have missed the deadline to take action relating to allegations of phone hacking at the Sun and News of the World

Jim Waterson Media editor

27, Apr, 2023 @6:42 PM

Article image
Prince Harry’s libel claim against Mail on Sunday boosted by high court ruling
Article about prince’s legal claim against Home Office contained ‘defamatory’ words, says judge

Haroon Siddique Legal affairs correspondent

08, Jul, 2022 @11:34 AM

Article image
Prince Harry loses high court challenge to personal security downgrade
Duke of Sussex fails in legal action against Home Office decision to reduce his security during visits to UK

Rachel Hall

28, Feb, 2024 @12:42 PM

Article image
Prince Harry challenges Home Office over decision to downgrade security
High court in London hears that wider impact of an attack on the duke should have been taken into account

Haroon Siddique Legal affairs correspondent

05, Dec, 2023 @2:08 PM

Article image
UK pledges £100m to Prince Harry’s campaign against landmines
Tripling of funding to rid world of weapon comes 20 years after Harry’s mother Princess Diana highlighted issue

Caroline Davies

04, Apr, 2017 @6:00 PM

Article image
Home Office must compensate trafficked women for lack of childcare, court rules
Two mothers from Albania brought the case after their children had to be at appointments where abuse details disclosed

Diane Taylor

24, May, 2021 @3:49 PM

Article image
Prince Harry’s phone-hacking case: what have we learned so far?
Verdict will be delivered in autumn, but Piers Morgan, a culture of excess and lawyers’ tactics have all been in the spotlight

Jim Waterson

30, Jun, 2023 @4:51 PM

Article image
UK too dangerous for us to visit, says Prince Harry
Duke of Sussex taking legal action against UK government to allow him to pay privately for police security

Caroline Davies

16, Jan, 2022 @4:16 PM

Article image
Home Office defies high court by placing 100 asylum-seeker children in hotels
Unlawful practice still used in Kent was condemned after more than 200 went missing from accommodation

Diane Taylor

01, Sep, 2023 @11:12 AM