Prince Harry's failed legal bid to reinstate his police protection 'cost the taxpayer more than £500,000'

Prince Harry's failed court case against the Home Office over the removal of his automatic police protection has cost the taxpayer more than £500,000, it was revealed yesterday.

Officials spent £514,128 fighting two separate judicial review claims brought by the Duke of Sussex after his security status was downgraded when he and wife Meghan ceased being working royals and moved to the US.

The legal bill could still increase, as Harry has vowed to appeal against his latest defeat when a judge last month ruled he had failed to prove the decision was unfair or unlawful.

The costs of the two claims will raise questions over a member of the Royal Family launching legal action against the Government.

The legal bill included more than £180,000 for barristers, £320,000 for the Government's legal department, which provides legal advice, and £3,200 in court fees, according to a Freedom of Information request by the Daily Telegraph.

Prince Harry's (pictured last March outside the High Court) failed court case against the Home Office over the removal of his automatic police protection has cost the taxpayer more than £500,000

Officials spent £514,128 fighting two separate judicial review claims brought by the Duke of Sussex after his security status was downgraded 

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry at the Invictus Games in Dusseldorf on September 16, 2023

Almost £10,000 was spent on the disclosure of electronic documents linked to the case, believed to include emails between civil servants and the Royal Household.

Harry, 39, claimed the decision by the Home Office's Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, was unfair and jeopardised the safety of him and his family.

His lawyers argued he was 'singled out' and treated less favourably than other VIPs.

The Home Office said Britain had 'finite public resources' and argued police protection should be limited to those 'acting in the interest of the State through their public role'.

A High Court judge ruled the decision to revoke his round-the-clock taxpayer-funded police protection and instead review his security needs on a case-by-case basis was lawful, and dismissed his case.

Prince Harry and Meghan, pictured at an Invictus Games event in Canada on February 14, 2024

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stand outside Kensington Palace after announcing their engagement in November 2017

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex attend an event in Whistler near Vancouver in the build up to the 2025 Invictus Games 

William, Harry, Meghan and Charles speak together at a service at Westminster Abbey in March 2019 - the year before the Sussexes stepped down as senior royals and moved to the US

The ruling left Harry with an estimated £1million legal bill. He was previously barred from bringing a separate claim over his request to pay for his own protection.

He is pursuing separate legal cases against News Group Newspapers, which publishes The Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, and Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail.

In January, he abandoned a libel claim against the Mail's sister paper The Mail on Sunday over an article about his security, leaving him facing an estimated £750,000 legal bill.

Weeks later he accepted 'substantial' damages to end a four-year legal case against Mirror Group Newspapers over phone hacking.