which is subordinate to the Home Office, and took his case to the High Court earlier this year. The decision, according to Harry’s attorneys, “singled him out” and treated him “less favorably.”
They said that the method to protecting him was “unlawful and unfair” since a risk analysis was not conducted and the consequences of a “successful attack” were not adequately considered.
The duke’s argument was dismissed by retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane on February 28, who found that Ravec’s approach was not procedurally unjust nor illogical.
‘An incorrect, formalist interpretation of the Ravec procedure’ was the stance Sir Peter took in his 52-page partly redacted verdict against Harry’s legal team.
Following the verdict, however, Harry’s legal representative said that the prince will be appealing the decision. On June 6, it was disclosed that on May 23, Lord Justice Bean had granted Harry permission to appeal.
