Prince Harry could be set to return to the UK next week for a Court of Appeal hearing regarding his security arrangements.
The two-day legal proceeding is scheduled for Tuesday, April 8 and Wednesday, April 9 in London.
The Duke of Sussex's appeal will be conducted mostly in public, following a recent Court of Appeal order.
Only the most confidential evidence will be heard during "short periods in private" sessions.
Prince Harry could be set to return to the UK next week for a Court of Appeal hearing regarding his security arrangements.
Getty
The ruling comes as Harry continues his legal battle against the Home Office over his personal security protection whilst in Britain.
The Court of Appeal judges, Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Bean and Lord Justice Edis, cited the principle of "open justice" as the basis for their decision.
Their order, handed down on Wednesday, states that opening submissions and arguments related to "non-confidential facts" will be held in open court.
This means press and public will be able to attend most of the proceedings.
The judges determined that "it should be possible to conduct most of the appeal in public, with only short periods in private".
The ruling comes as Harry continues his legal battle against the Home Office over his personal security protection whilst in Britain.
Getty
They emphasised their commitment to adhering to the open justice principle "as faithfully as possible in the particular circumstances of this case".
The Duke has taken legal action against the Home Office over a February 2020 decision by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec).
This decision determined that Harry would not receive the "same degree" of personal protective security when visiting Britain as he did as a full-time working royal.
In February 2024, retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane rejected the Duke's case.
Sir Peter concluded that Ravec's approach was neither irrational nor procedurally unfair.
Prince Harry is now appealing against that ruling in next week's scheduled hearing.
In their order, the judges acknowledged that some evidence in the case is "highly confidential" by agreement of both parties.
This sensitive material "relates to security arrangements and threat levels and assessments for the claimant and other public figures".
The Court of Appeal explained why such information must remain private.
"It is obvious that such material would be of interest to anyone wishing to harm a person," the judges stated.
They noted that while some protected material is "entangled with less sensitive details", the court would balance confidentiality needs with public access.
LATEST ROYAL NEWS:
The Duke's lawyers previously told the High Court that he was "singled out" and treated "less favourably" in Ravec's decision.
Getty
This approach aims to protect sensitive security information while maintaining transparency in the proceedings.
The Duke's lawyers previously told the High Court that he was "singled out" and treated "less favourably" in Ravec's decision.
They argued that a failure to carry out a risk analysis and fully consider the impact of a "successful attack" on him meant the approach to his protection was "unlawful and unfair".
The Government has maintained a different position throughout the legal proceedings.
Home Office representatives argued that Ravec was entitled to conclude the Duke's protection should be "bespoke".
They further stated his security arrangements should be considered on a "case-by-case" basis rather than following his previous royal protection model.
