Prince Harry loses court challenge over U.K. security protection

0

BEĞENDİM

ABONE OL

News

0

Prince Harry was not improperly stripped of his publicly funded security detail during visits to Britain after he gave up his status as a working member of the royal family and moved to the U.S., a London judge ruled Wednesday.Justice Peter Lane said in the High Court that the decision to provide security to Harry on a case-by-case basis was not unlawful, irrational or unjustified.The Duke of Sussex claimed he and his family were endangered when visiting the U.K. because of hostility toward him and his wife on social media and relentless hounding by news media.His lawyer argued that the government group that evaluated Harry’s security needs acted irrationally and failed to follow its own policies that should have required a risk analysis of the duke’s safety. 5:12Will Prince Harry return to royal duties amid King Charles’ cancer diagnosis?Will Prince Harry return to royal duties amid King Charles’ cancer diagnosis?Prince Harry brings star power to Vancouver Invictus Games training campPrince Harry breaks silence on visit with King Charles and Royal family reunionPrince Harry and Meghan Markle go skiing in B.C.Previous VideoNext VideoStory continues below advertisementA government lawyer said Harry had been treated fairly and was still provided protection on some visits, citing a security detail that guarded him in June 2021 when he was chased by photographers after attending an event with seriously ill children at Kew Gardens in west London.The email you need for the day’s top news stories from Canada and around the world.The committee that made the decision to reject his security request considered the wider impact that the “tragic death” of his mother, the late Princess Diana, had on the nation, and in making its decision gave greater weight to the “likely significant public upset were a successful attack” on her son to happen, lawyer James Eadie said.More on WorldShip hit by Yemen’s Houthi rebels sinks in Red Sea, first to be lost in conflictU.S. man eats 34,000 Big Macs in his lifetime, extending world record Will Fani Willis be removed from Trump’s Georgia case? Judge indicates ruling soonBiden says U.S. military to airdrop food, supplies into GazaHarry, 39, the younger son of King Charles III, has broken ranks with royal family tradition in his willingness to go to court to challenge both the government and take on tabloids in his effort to hold publishers accountable for hounding him throughout his life.The lawsuit was one of six cases Harry has brought in the High Court. Three were related to his security arrangements and three have been against tabloid publishers for allegedly hacking phones and using private investigators to snoop on his life for news stories.Trending NowMan gets 25 years to life for killing woman in car mistakenly in his driveway‘Devastated’: Potato chip factory in small New Brunswick town destroyed in large fireIn his first case to go to trial, Harry won a big victory last year against the publisher of the Daily Mirror over phone hacking allegations, winning a judgment in court and ultimately settling remaining allegations that were due to go to trial. While the settlement was undisclosed, he was to be reimbursed for all his legal fees and was due to receive an interim payment of 400,000 pounds ($505,000).Story continues below advertisement 2:06How King Charles’ cancer diagnosis affects Royal familyHow King Charles’ cancer diagnosis affects Royal familyPrince Harry back in U.K. after King Charles’ cancer diagnosisLondoners react to King Charles’ cancer diagnosis, Prince Harry’s return to U.K .Prince Harry arrives in London to visit King Charles after cancer diagnosisKate Middleton released from hospital 2 weeks after abdominal surgeryPrevious VideoNext VideoHe recently withdrew a libel case against the Daily Mail over an article that said he tried to hide his efforts to continue receiving government-funded security. Harry dropped the case after a judge ruled he was more likely to lose at trial because the publisher could show that statements issued on his behalf were misleading and that the February 2022 article reflected an “honest opinion” and wasn’t libellous.Harry failed to persuade a different judge last year that he should be able to privately pay for London’s police force to guard him when he comes to town. A judge denied that offer after a government lawyer argued that officers shouldn’t be used as “private bodyguards for the wealthy.”