The Duke of Sussex has lost a High Court challenge against the government over his security when in the UK.
Prince Harry was contesting a decision to downgrade his security status when he stopped being a working royal.
He argued he had been treated unfairly in the changes to his police protection, when he still faced significant security threats.
Prince Harry is to appeal against the court's ruling that there was nothing unlawful in these security decisions.
"The duke is not asking for preferential treatment," said his lawyers after the High Court ruling, but they argue there has been an unfairness in how decisions were made about his publicly-funded police protection.
When Prince Harry stepped back from being a working royal and moved to the US, he was no longer automatically provided with the same level of police protection given to the Royal Family, but instead had his security decided on a case-by-case basis, in the same way as other high-profile visitors to the UK.
Prince Harry's attempt to challenge how this was decided has now been rejected, with the court upholding the actions of the committee that oversees security arrangements for the Royal Family and other high profile public figures, known as "Ravec", which brings together representatives of the Home Office, Metropolitan Police and the Royal Household.
The judge ruled there had been no unlawfulness in the decision-making or anything that could be called irrational in the changes to Prince Harry's security in February 2020 - and even if there had been any "procedural unfairness" it would not have changed the outcome.
Much of the hearing had been heard in private for security reasons - and parts of the ruling were redacted - but the ruling found that the approach of having a "bespoke" arrangement for Prince Harry, rather than the same as working royals, was "legally sound".
An earlier separate court ruling had rejected a bid by Prince Harry to make private financial payments for police protection when in the UK.
Prince Harry's legal battles over his security in the UK have reflected his worries about his safety and for his family - with only a few brief visits to the UK in the past couple of years.
The court documents highlight concerns such as Prince Harry being "ambushed" by paparazzi photographers at a WellChild awards event in Kew in London in June 2021.
This was more alarming "in the light of what happened to his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales", the court was told.
The details of the ruling also give support to Prince Harry and Meghan's account of being pursued after an awards event in New York City in May 2023.
There had been some scepticism about their claims of a paparazzi car chase, but the court documents include reports from the New York City Police Department of a "reckless disregard of vehicle and traffic laws and persistently dangerous and unacceptable behaviour on the part of paparazzi".
The court documents suggest the extent of planning for each visit to the UK.
In March 2023 Prince Harry made headlines with
a surprise appearance at the Royal Courts of Justice in London in a case against Associated Newspapers.
The court papers, although redacted, show his six-day visit had been preceded weeks before by exchanges between the prince's "director of European security" and UK security bodies, including the Ravec committee.
It highlighted risk factors such as Prince Harry being "the son of King Charles III, a brother of the Prince of Wales, and that al-Qaeda had recently called for the claimant to be killed".
In response to the court ruling rejecting Prince Harry's challenge to the security arrangements, the Home Office welcomed the decision and said: "The UK government's protective security system is rigorous and proportionate."
Prince Harry's lawyers will now pursue an appeal, arguing that the Ravec committee failed to apply its own rules and rejecting the "bespoke" approach.
"The Duke of Sussex hopes he will obtain justice from the Court of Appeal," said a legal spokesperson.
Although not commenting on the outcome, on Wednesday afternoon Prince Harry released a video supporting awards for children facing complex health needs.
It was the WellChild awards - which were the focus of the claims about the paparazzi threat in 2021 mentioned in the court case.
www.bbc.co.uk
