The Duke of Sussex has won the right to fight in the Court of Appeal for increased personal security on visits to the UK.
Prince Harry has been locked in a four-year battle with the government after a February 2020 decision to downgrade his right to taxpayer-funded protection.
He and wife Meghan stepped down as working Royals and moved across the Atlantic, prompting the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) to change his security rights.
Harry says he and his family are at risk because of the decision.
In February this year, retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane dismissed Harry’s claim and concluded Ravec’s actions had not been irrational nor procedurally unfair, and should not be overturned.
But the Prince has now been granted permission to bring a Court of Appeal challenge to Sir Peter’s decision.
Harry’s lawyers had expressed their intention to bring an appeal after the February ruling, when Sir Peter concluded the way the Duke’s case had been handled was “legally sound”.
The judge said he accepted comments from Sir Richard Mottram, the former chairman of Ravec, who said that, even if he had received a document setting out all of Harry’s legal arguments in February 2020, “I would have reached the same decision for materially the same reasons”.
Harry argues that Ravec, in using a “bespoke” process for him, failed to stick to a written policy that would be applied to others, and in particular that excluded him from a risk analysis.
“The Duke of Sussex hopes he will obtain justice from the Court of Appeal”, his lawyers said at the time.
Ravec has responsibility, delegated by the Home Office, for the provision of protective security arrangements for members of the royal family and VIPs, with involvement from the Metropolitan Police, the Cabinet Office and the royal household.
Lord Justice Bean announced the decision to grant permission to appeal in a ruling, which is dated May 23 but only came to light today.
During the High Court case, it was revealed that Duke had been threatened by terrorist group Al Qaeda after he claimed in his memoir Spare to have killed 25 Taliban fighters while serving in Afghanistan.
Harry was left with the prospect of having to pay 90 per cent of the Home Office’s legal bills after losing the High Court case.
His first application for permission to appeal was rejected by a High Court judge, but he has been successful the second time after making an application directly to the Court of Appeal.
