However, retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane dismissed the Duke’s case on Wednesday morning, concluding that Ravec’s approach was neither irrational nor procedurally unfair.
Sir Peter said Harry’s lawyers had taken “an inappropriate, formalist interpretation of the Ravec process”.
In a 52-page document, partially hidden, it states that Harry said in 2020 that there was an “obvious difference” between him as a Royal and someone else, regarding his needs for personal protection.
The Duke explained that he was “born” into a high-profile family and his security threat will “never decrease”.
The document reads: “The claimant said that he would ‘like them to provide an example of where someone else has [redacted text].
“The obvious difference aside from that is the fact that I was born into this and the threat will never decrease because of my status regarding the Family’.”
Harry shared in a statement: “The UK is central to the heritage of my children and a place I want them to feel at home, as much as where they live at the moment in the United States.
“That cannot happen if it’s not possible to keep them safe when they are on UK soil. I cannot put my wife in danger like that and, given my experiences in life, I am reluctant to unnecessarily put myself in harm’s way too.”
Prince Harry, who wasn’t at the court in December, lives across the ocean with his wife Meghan Markle and their kids.
This court decision might change how often they can come to the UK. Harry says without good safety protection, it’s too risky for him to visit.
A Royal spokesperson said Harry will challenge the court’s decision.
