Prince Harry is pressing ahead with his legal battle with the Home Office over his taxpayer-funded security, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
This newspaper has learned that a two-day hearing will be held in the Court of Appeal in April, in the latest dramatic twist in Harry’s three-year legal battle with the Government.
The Duke of Sussex’s determination to restore his 24-hour security while in the UK is understood to be part of his desire to return here more regularly.
The looming court showdown comes after the MoS revealed last week how the Duke had sought advice from trusted aides in Britain on how to plan a return from self-imposed exile in the United States.
Earlier this year, a High Court judge ruled that Harry had “utterly lost” a “frankly futile” attempt to appeal against a Home Office decision on his safety in the UK.
Prince Harry (pictured leaving the High Court) is pressing ahead with his legal battle against the Home Office over his taxpayer-funded security, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
This comes shortly after the Mail On Sunday revealed the Duke (pictured) was attempting to return to Britain following his self-imposed exile in the United States.
She had sought a judicial review of a decision by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) to remove her right to automatic police protection after she left the working Royal Family.
However, in May the Court of Appeal granted him permission to challenge the High Court ruling.
Now, a court official has confirmed that a date has been set for the Duke’s appeal to be heard in London, starting on April 8 or 9.
The hearing is also listed on an official, publicly accessible website, which shows how the case was moved to the Court of Appeal’s docket office on July 12.
The King and his son are believed to be at a stand-off over Harry’s decision to continue his legal fight, which has so far cost the British taxpayer £500,000.
Charles is said to consider the dispute “very complicated” because it means “Her Majesty’s son is suing Her Majesty’s Government” and he does not want to be involved in it.
‘However, Harry reportedly believes members of his father’s family influenced the decision to remove his beefed-up security.
Royal biographer Ingrid Seward described Harry as a person with “tunnel vision” and said the King knows his son is “very stubborn”.
“It’s damaging to his father,” he added. “It’s embarrassing for his father on a more personal level to think that his own son doesn’t feel safe in the country, in his own homeland.”
‘Harry, he doesn’t let things go. It’s his nature, a bit like his mother. It’s very typical of Diana to pursue something and Harry doesn’t let it go despite the advice he’s given. I think this doesn’t help the situation at all.’
Harry was given full, publicly funded protection before stepping down as a working royal and moving to Montecito, California, with his American wife Meghan Markle four years ago.
King Charles III (pictured in 2024) is said to have found the legal dispute difficult as it means “His Majesty’s son is suing His Majesty’s Government”.
Harry was given entirely taxpayer-funded protection before stepping down as a working royal and moving to Montecito, California, with Meghan Markle (pictured, in San Basilio de Palenque)
You still receive protection when returning to Britain in specific circumstances, but you must give 28 days’ notice of your plans.
While the Duke is not seeking a permanent return to the UK, the decision to continue his legal fight against the Home Office is believed to be an indication he wants to spend more time here.
Sources told this newspaper that the duke had been consulting people “from his old life”, which it is claimed marked the first stage of a strategy to “rehabilitate” him to spend more time in the UK, repair his fractured relationship with his father and potentially begin a partial return to the Royal Family.
She is believed not to have seen her father since a brief meeting earlier this year, when it was announced the monarch had been diagnosed with cancer.
In his recent biography of the Princess of Wales, Robert Jobson said the King and Harry spent just 30 minutes together at Clarence House. “Clearly not enough to mend shattered bridges, not after all the disparagement and misrepresentations echoed from Montecito,” he wrote. “After a brief embrace and a brief conversation, they said goodbye.”
A source said last night that Harry’s apparent refusal to drop the legal case risks undermining a possible rapprochement with his father, adding: “Regaining trust is a big issue.”
Mrs Seward added: “This is not going to help any reconciliation because it will upset the King. But he knows his son and probably realises that Harry is not going to let him go.”
Harry believes he cannot currently bring his wife, Meghan, and their two children, Prince Archie, five, and Princess Lilibet, three, to the UK.
His lawyers argue that changes to his police protection have treated him unfairly because he still faces significant security threats.
Lord Justice Bean gave Harry the green light to appeal as there was a “real prospect of success” in the Duke’s argument that Ravec should have followed his written policy.
But he rejected a proposal to speed up the appeal, saying Harry should not “jump the queue because of his status”.
A source said Harry’s (pictured at the coronation of King Charles III) reported refusal to drop the legal case risks undermining a potential reconciliation with his father.
The Duke of Sussex is believed to have inherited millions of pounds from his late Queen Mother (pictured with Princess Diana in 1992) on his 40th birthday.
Are you eligible to receive millions from your great-grandmother?
Prince Harry will receive millions of pounds from the late Queen Mother when he celebrates his 40th birthday next Sunday, according to reports.
The Queen Mother is believed to have placed £19m into a trust fund for her great-grandchildren in 1994.
Reports at the time suggested that William and Harry would claim their shares in two payments: on their 21st and 40th birthdays.
Royal experts suggest Prince Harry will receive a larger share than his brother as compensation for not being sovereign.
A former palace aide told The Times the trust “was a way of passing on a portion of his wealth in a tax-efficient way.”
Other beneficiaries include Zara and Peter Phillips and the Duke of York’s daughters Beatrice and Eugenie.
