A Court of Appeal judge has ruled that Prince Harry cannot “jump the queue” in his legal battle against the UK government over security arrangements during visits to Britain. According to reports by Reuters, the Duke of Sussex had sought an expedited hearing for his appeal against a previous High Court ruling that backed the government’s decision to withdraw his taxpayer-funded police protection
The Duke, who stepped back from royal duties in 2020 and relocated to California with his wife Meghan Markle, launched legal action after being told he would no longer receive automatic security from the Metropolitan Police while in the UK. He argued that the ruling left him unable to return home safely with his family.
In February, the High Court ruled in favour of the government, stating their decision to remove Harry’s round-the-clock police protection was reasonable given his change in status. Harry’s legal team subsequently applied for permission to appeal and requested an expedited hearing by the end of July, citing concerns the ruling could influence security approaches in other countries.
However, Lord Justice Bean, while granting permission for the appeal to be heard, rejected Harry’s bid to expedite proceedings. “It is rightly not suggested that the claimant is entitled to jump the queue because of his status,” the judge stated, as reported by news outlets.
The Duke had argued the litigation had already dragged on for over two years and that his legal team would be occupied with other matters from October onwards. But Lord Justice Bean maintained the court’s position, saying Harry could not bypass the queue simply due to his royal standing.
Reports indicate the judge acknowledged that if Harry were to win his appeal, the issue of legal costs would need revisiting. The Duke was previously ordered to pay 90% of the government’s legal fees from the initial case, though the total amount was not disclosed.
While granting permission for appeal, Lord Justice Bean expressed hesitation, suggesting Harry’s challenge on the grounds that the royal security committee failed to follow its own policy had “a real prospect of success.” However, he dismissed claims that the initial cost ruling was flawed as “hopeless.”
The legal battle stems from a decision in 2020 by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC) to withdraw Harry’s taxpayer-funded security after he stepped back from official duties. Harry has maintained he is unable to fund private security of the required calibre himself.
As the appeal process continues, the Duke currently believes he cannot safely bring his wife Meghan and their two children to visit the UK due to security concerns, according to news reports citing his legal representatives.
The high-profile case has garnered significant public interest, with some criticizing Harry for pursuing costly legal action while others argue he should receive appropriate security given the potential risks. As it progresses through the courts, the outcome could have wider implications for royals’ security arrangements in the future.
