Prince Harry made several incorrect claims throughout his High Court battle before suffering a crushing defeat.
The Duke of Sussex was challenging a 2020 decision made by Ravec to remove his automatic right to police protection when he returns to the UK.
However, the court ruled on Wednesday that Harry, 39, was not entitled to automatic police protection since stepping down as a working royal, and that it should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
The Duke of Sussex made several incorrect claims as part of his case, according to a High Court judge.
Prince Harry has lost his right to automatic police protection in the UK
Getty
For example, Harry claimed that the decision to strip his taxpayer-funded security was made without his knowledge.
However, the High Court judge said “a paper provided by the royal household in January 2020 warned the claimant that he would likely need private security”.
Lord Sedwill, who was the cabinet secretary at the time, explained to Fiona McIlwham, Harry’s private secretary, that the duke “should have no expectation of his existing security arrangements remaining the same”.
Prince Harry also said he was considered an "exceptional member" of those covered by the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec).
Prince Harry lost his High Court battle on WednesdayGettyThe judge later said this was “an inappropriate, formalist interpretation of the Ravec process”.
The duke additionally believed he should have “ongoing presence” when he visits the UK with Meghan Markle, but the judge said: “The ‘bespoke’ process devised for [Harry] in the [Ravec] decision of 28 February, 2020, was and is legally sound.”
Prince Harry criticised Sir Richard Mottram, the chairman of Ravec until 2021, for taking a “contradictory position” with regards to supplying security on a case-by-case basis.
But the judge said: “Ravec was not only entitled but obliged to approach matters on a case-by-case basis as regards certain cases, given their exceptional characteristics.”
Prince Harry is appealing the High Court's decisionGettyLATEST ROYAL NEWS:
Harry launched legal action against the Home Office following a 2020 decision by Ravec
PAHarry also noted that a “successful attack” on the duke was not considered by Ravec, which was refuted by the judge who said it was “bizarre” to suggest this of the “highly experienced chair”.
The 39-year-old later complained that his offer to pay for the cost of protective security was not taken into account by Ravec.
But the judge said Mottram stated a person is “either entitled to the relevant protection as a member of the Ravec cohort or they are not”.
Finally, Harry claimed it was “irrational” for him to give 28 days’ notice for when he visits the UK, if he wanted security.
The judge said Harry failed to provide evidence that the rule was “imposed for some extraneous reason”.
