[ad_1]
Get the free Morning Headlines e mail for information from our reporters the world over
Sign as much as our free Morning Headlines e mail
Prince Harry is going through an estimated legal bill of round £1m after shedding a High Court problem in opposition to the federal government over taxpayer-funded security whereas he’s within the UK.
The Duke of Sussex had taken the Home Office to courtroom after it minimize spending on his private security, with the 39-year-old claiming the choice, made in 2020, might put him in danger.
But retired High Court decide Sir Peter Lane rejected the prince’s case in a ruling on Wednesday – and now the royal might additionally doubtlessly be landed with a enormous courtroom bill in consequence.
On high of probably having to pay for his personal laywers, as a result of he misplaced the case it’s probably he’ll now additionally choose up the bill for the Home Office’s legal prices – as is what usually occurs to the shedding aspect after High Court hearings.
According to The Times, the Home Office prices up till October have been £407,000. That included £265,437 for the Government Legal Department and £137, 864 for barristers because the legal grievance was filed in September 2021. That whole quantity was earlier than a three-day trial in December.
It’s not clear how a lot Harry is prone to pay for his personal legal crew – nevertheless it’s identified he employed the high-profile legislation agency Schillings International together with 4 barristers.
With his personal prices and the Home Office’s mixed, it’s believed Harry’s legal bill from the High Court problem might attain £1m, in line with estimates from The Times. He may very well be saved from the fee if he wins an enchantment to the ruling – which he has mentioned he’ll lodge.
Harry took legal motion in opposition to the Home Office after being advised he would not be given the “same degree” of publicly-funded safety when within the nation.
The determination by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) had “singled out” the royal and handled him “less favourably”, his attorneys argued.
The cut-back was introduced after Prince Harry and his spouse, Meghan Markle, determined to “step back as senior members of the royal family’ as they bid to become financially independent.
But Judge Lane rejected the duke’s case, concluding that Ravec’s approach was not irrational nor procedurally unfair.
In his 52-page partially redacted ruling, the judge said Harry’s lawyers had taken “an inappropriate, formalist interpretation of the Ravec process”, including: “The ‘bespoke’ process devised for the claimant in the decision of 28 February 2020 was, and is, legally sound.”
Shortly after the ruling, a legal spokesperson for Harry mentioned he would enchantment.
He mentioned: “The duke is not asking for preferential treatment, but for a fair and lawful application of Ravec’s own rules, ensuring that he receives the same consideration as others in accordance with Ravec’s own written policy.”
When requested by The Independent, the Home Office wouldn’t touch upon its legal prices. A spokesperson mentioned: “We are pleased that the court has found in favour of the government’s position in this case, and we are carefully considering our next steps. It would be inappropriate to comment further.”
The security case is one of three current High Court instances introduced by the duke, alongside claims over allegations of illegal info gathering in opposition to publishers News Group Newspapers (NGN) and Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL).
Earlier this yr, Harry settled the remaining components of his telephone hacking declare in opposition to Mirror Group Newspapers, with the royal receiving a “substantial” payout.
[ad_2]
Source hyperlink