Palace returns serve after Harry’s bombshell

Prince Harry has given a bombshell interview after losing his latest court battle but Buckingham Palace has swiftly returned serve.

Prince Harry has said he would “love a reconciliation” with the royal family but King Charles “won’t speak to me”, as Buckingham Palace issued a blunt statement in response.

The Duke of Sussex’s emotional comments came in a far reaching interview with the BBC after he lost a British court battle on Friday over his taxpayer funded UK security arrangements, which the Government downgraded when he moved overseas and stepped back from royal duties.

Harry said he was “devastated” by the legal failure which was due to an “old fashioned establishment stitch up”.

He also said he did “not know how much time my father has”. King Charles is receiving treatment for cancer.

MORE: Prince Harry’s $200m UK secret revealed

On Friday, UK time, the UK Court of Appeal ruled against Prince Harry in a case that could end up costing him more than $3 million in legal fees.

Buckingham Palace welcomed the court’s decision.

The Duke, who was not in the UK for the verdict, can appeal the ruling to the UK Supreme Court.

“I’m devastated,” Harry told the BBC. “Not so much as devastated with the loss that I am about the people behind the decision, feeling as though this is okay. Is it a win for them?”

In a new interview, Prince Harry has hit back after a huge court loss. Picture: BBC.

MORE: Real reason Harry, Meghan booted from royal home

The Duke of Sussex brought the case against the UK’s Home Office and the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec.

The legal row centred on to what extent the Sussex’s could expect security to be provided to them when in the UK after they walked away from Britain and royal life.

The UK government downgraded their security and said protection would be provided on a case-by-case basis when Harry returned but he had to give notice.

Prince Harry had argued his family needed around-the-clock protection within the UK at any time because of the threats they had received. He claimed he and Meghan had been “singled out” from the protection given to other royals, reported The Sun.

Harry said he didn't know how long King Charles III "has”. (Photo by Chris Jackson/Getty Images)

Harry’s testimony ‘moving’ but no legal issue

But on Friday, UK time, in Britain’s Court of Appeal, Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Bean and Lord Justice Edis ruled against him in a humiliating blow for the prince.

It also means he faces paying the legal costs for both sides, which is estimated to be more than £1.5 million ($A3.09 million).

In his Judgement, Sir Geoffrey said Harry’s arguments had been “moving” but did not amount to an actual legal challenge.

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

“An unintended consequence of his decision to step back from royal duties and spend the majority of his time abroad has been that he has been provided with a more bespoke, and generally lesser, level of protection than when he was in the UK.

“That did not in itself give rise to a legal complaint.”

Prince Harry said he could not bring his family back to the UK due to security concerns. Picture: BBC.

‘Establishment stitch up’

Talking to the BBC, Prince Harry said the court’s decision meant he feared for his family’s safety in Britain.

“I can’t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the UK at this point,” he said.

“I love my country I always have done, despite what some people in that country have done.

“I miss the UK. It’s really quite sad that I won’t be able to show my children my homeland”.

Harry said his security downgrade was put in place under the previous Conservative government and with a new Labour government in place he insinuated a change could occur. But that would also involve Charles allowing a security review to take place.

“There is a lot of control and ability in my father’s hands,” the Duke said.

“Ultimately, this could be resolved through him, not necessarily by intervening, but by stepping aside, allowing the experts to do what is necessary.

“I have had it described to me... that this is a good, old fashioned establishment stitch up, and that’s what it feels like.”

Palace responds

Buckingham Palace released a short statement, published by The Sun, shortly afterwards, with a spokesman saying, “All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion”.

Prince Harry said some people in his family will never forgive him. (Photo by Kirsty O'Connor / POOL / AFP)

‘My family will never forgive me’

Elsewhere in the interview, Harry said despite the bad blood between him and the other Windsors, safety was paramount.

“There have been so many disagreements between me and some of my family,” Harry said.

“Of course, some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book.

“(But) this current situation that has been ongoing for five years with regards to human life and safety is the sticking point. It is the only thing that’s left.”

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Britain's Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, attend a children's event at the 2023 Invictus Games in Dusseldorf, western Germany on September 13, 2023. . (Photo by Odd ANDERSEN / AFP)

‘Don't know how long my father has’

“I would love reconciliation with my family,” Harry continued.

“I don’t know how much longer my father has. He won’t speak to me because of this security stuff, but it would be nice to be nice to reconcile

“(But) there’s no point in continuing to fight anymore … life is precious.”

The court had been told previously that Prince Harry had offered to fund his own Police armed bodyguards but officials refused – with insiders insisting cops are not “guns for hire”.

Today’s ruling comes after another court case where UK High Court judge Sir Peter Lane rejected the duke’s case and ruled Ravec’s approach was not irrational or procedurally unfair.

In his ruling in February, the judge said there had not been any “unlawfulness” in the call to pull Harry’s security.

He also explained Harry’s lawyers had taken “an inappropriate, formalist interpretation of the Ravec process”.

The judge added: “The ‘bespoke’ process devised for the claimant in the decision of 28 February 2020 was, and is, legally sound.”

Originally published as Palace returns serve after Harry’s bombshell