header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Why the court said no to Prince Harry

16 June 2023
Issue: 8029 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Judicial review , National security
printer mail-detail
126375
Prince Harry has been making Royal legal history recently by appearing in court, although some of his legal action has encountered obstacles. In this week’s NLJ, writer Nicholas Dobson looks into the decision to refuse judicial review of the Duke of Sussex’s security provisions.

As one of the most famous people in the world, and with some fanatical opponents as well as a devoted fan base, security is a major concern for the duke. He challenged the home secretary’s decision to delegate the ‘in principle’ decision on the provision of protective security after he stepped down from his role as a working Royal.

Dobson writes: ‘As a seasoned litigant running various current actions, the duke is definitely keeping some members of the legal profession actively busy on his behalf.’

Dobson covers the background to the action, the various arguments for and against, grounds of challenge, relevant caselaw and the decision—read more here.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll