Prince Harry has received a huge blow this afternoon as he has lost his long-running legal battle with the Home Office over hisUK security arrangements. The King’s youngest son, 40, sought to challenge the original decision by High Court judge Sir Peter Lane in February last year, which determined that the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) was right to remove his high-level police protection while he’s in the UK.

But in a ruling on Friday, Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Bean and Lord Justice Edis dismissed Harry’s appeal. Sir Geoffrey Vos summarised the decision and told the court that while the Duke of Sussex’s personal arguments were both “powerful and moving”, he concluded that: “I could not say that the Duke’s sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for the challenge to Ravec’s decision.”

He said: “The duke was in effect stepping in and out of the cohort of protection provided by Ravec. Outside the UK, he was outside the cohort, but when in the UK, his security would be considered as appropriate.”

The judge added: “It was impossible to say that this reasoning was illogical or inappropriate, indeed it seemed sensible.”

The decision will be devastating for Harry, who recently said that he had considered this case to be of even more importance than his crusade against the British press. He told the Telegraph at the conclusion of a two-day hearing last month: “This one always mattered the most.”

Harry flew back to London for the hearing, even though he wasn’t required to give evidence. His attendance was seen as a sign of how important the case was to him.

The Duke’s barrister told the Court of Appeal that he was “singled out” for “inferior treatment” and that his safety, security and life are “at stake”.

Harry has previously claimed that it would not be safe to bring his wife and their children to the UK unless his previous level of police protection was restored.

But yesterday, the court ruled unanimously that the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) hadn’t treated Harry unfairly when it decided to review his protection on a case-by-case basis each time he visits the UK.

Ravec’s decision was made in 2020, after Harry and his wife decided to step down as senior working royals and move to the US.

Sir Geoffrey said Ravec’s decision was “understandable and perhaps predictable”, though he added that it was “plain that the duke felt badly treated by the system”.

Last month, Harry said that the removal of his police protection was “difficult to swallow” and claimed that the decision was made to prevent him and Meghan from leaving Britain to start a new life.

He has previously hinted that the case was at the heart of his rift with his father, whom he has not seen in 15 months.

Harry was not present at Friday’s short hearing. Today’s outcome means that Harry is likely to be left with a large bill to pay, as he will have to pay the UK Government’s legal fees in addition to his own.

“It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”

The Home Office, which is legally responsible for Ravec’s decisions, opposed the appeal, with its lawyers telling the court that Ravec’s decision was taken in a “unique set of circumstances” and that there was “no proper basis” for challenging it.

Last year, retired High Court judge Sir Peter Lane ruled that Ravec’s decision was lawful.

Shaheed Fatima KC, for the duke, told the court that he and the Duchess of Sussex “felt forced to step back” from their roles as senior working royals as they felt they “were not being protected by the institution”.