The date of King Charles III’s coronation has been set but remains a secret, it was revealed in a court case today.
The Duke of Norfolk was hauled to court today after he was caught running a red light whilst on his mobile phone.
As the peer, who organised the Queen's funeral, already had nine points on his licence he faced a driving ban.
Despite his best efforts to appeal the Earl Marshal, Duke of Norfolk, was this afternoon banned from driving for six months at Lavender Hill Magistrates’ Court after pleading guilty to using his mobile phone behind the wheel.
His lawyer earlier tried to appeal against the ban arguing it would cause “exceptional hardship” in Duke’s next job - organising the King’s coronation.
The peer, who’s real name is Edward Fitzalan-Howard is the Earl Marshal and organised the state funeral and procession for the Queen, and now must see the crown is passed to her son.
After confessing to driving crimes he attempted to fight against a driving ban and amidst proceedings it was revealed a date has already been set for Charles’ coronation.
His lawyer argued the appeal would need to be heard in private because it would consider issues of “national security” around the coronation.
Arguing for the press to be removed from the hearing, Natasha Dardashti, representing the Duke, said: “It’s an extremely peculiar situation whereby his grace, the Duke of Norfolk, is Earl Marshal.
“One of his responsibilities is for the preparation and organisation of the funeral of Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth II.
"He is now the person in the country responsible for the coronation of His Royal Highness King Charles III.
“Details will be provided that have not yet been discussed with His Royal Highness King Charles, not yet discussed with the Prime Minister, not yet been discussed with the Archbishop of Canterbury.
“It would be unacceptable for these details to be public or made known, to risk the escape of that information of a very sensitive nature.
“It is the first time we have had a coronation in 70 years, it’s a huge undertaking, lots of what might seem to be not very interesting evidence to be given. The reality is it is extremely sensitive.
“For most of the sensitive information, very few people have been made aware of the planning: the date - which is a matter of national security – and some of the other key components.”
Her argument was successful and the press and public were removed from the hearing whilst issues of “national security” were discussed.
But Lavender Hill Magistrates Court forgot to invite them back in afterwards.
And the fact a date has been set for the upcoming coronation was quietly slipped out amongst the proceedings.
It was branded a matter of “national security” - but little more is known as the appeal continued in private.
The Duke was caught running a red light on his phone, talking to his then wife, in Wandsworth, London back on April 7.
He initially denied offences, but admitted to them in court today, choosing instead to appeal, which later failed.
Alongside his six month driving ban, the Duke was also ordered to pay an £800 fine, £350 in costs, and an £80 surcharge.
The peer already had nine points on his licence from two speeding offences in 2019, combined with six points from the most recent breach, meaning he faced a driving ban for six months.
A driving ban is automatic when a driver has over 12 points unless it can be argued it would cause "exceptional hardship" to them.
Outlining the facts of the driving offence, prosecutor Jonathan Bryan said: "The time was just before 3.45pm, it was a Thursday. Officers were in a vehicle on Battersea Park Road when they saw a BMW.
"Officers were stationary at a traffic lights, which turned green.
"A BMW cut across them and on that basis the officers assumed it must have gone through a red light because their light was green.
"One of the officers noticed the driver was using a mobile phone while doing this and didn't seem to be paying attention.
"The officers drove up to the BMW and saw through the window that the driver was using his mobile phone.
"They spoke to the driver, who was his grace. There was a conversation about the use of a mobile phone.
"He said he had not been aware of going through the red light but accepted this was because he was using his mobile phone.
"He said he was in communication with his wife."
