Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has been granted the right to appeal against a High Court ruling that dismissed his bid for increased security during his visits to the United Kingdom. The 39-year-old royal had previously lost his legal fight against the Home Office, claiming he had been treated "less favourably" than other members of the royal family regarding his government-funded protection.

The Court of Appeal has now ruled that Harry can challenge Sir Peter Lane's dismissal of his case, according to an order by Lord Justice Bean dated May 23. The decision comes after the duke's lawyers argued that the so-called "bespoke process" applied to him was no substitute for a proper risk analysis, which they claimed had been excluded from the decision-making process in February 2020.

A legal spokesman for Harry stated that the duke intends to appeal, emphasizing that he is not seeking preferential treatment but rather a fair and lawful application of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) rules. "The Duke of Sussex hopes he will obtain justice from the Court of Appeal, and makes no further comment while the case is ongoing," the spokesman added.

The legal battle began after Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, were stripped of their round-the-clock protection when they stepped back from royal duties in 2020. The duke had complained that he was unable to return to the UK with his family, including his children Archie and Lilibet, "because it is too dangerous." While he was allowed security when staying at royal residences or attending royal events, he had to fend for himself if he wanted to visit friends.

During a hearing in May last year, Harry's lawyers argued that he was "singled out" and treated "less favourably" in the decision. However, Home Office lawyers countered that he was no longer part of a group of people whose "security position" was under regular review by Ravec and that he was instead "brought back within the cohort in the appropriate circumstances."

The High Court's findings concluded that there had been no unlawfulness in reaching the decision of February 28, 2020, and that any departure from policy was justified. The court also found that the decision was not irrational or marred by procedural unfairness, and even if such unfairness had occurred, it was highly likely that the outcome for the claimant would not have been substantially different.

Despite the initial setback, Harry's legal team persisted in their efforts to challenge the ruling. Judge David Bean, in granting permission for an appeal, stated that he was persuaded, "not without hesitation," that Harry's challenge on the grounds that RAVEC had not followed its own stated policy had a real prospect of success.

The case against the government is just one of several high-profile legal battles that Prince Harry has brought before the High Court, with others involving lawsuits against major players in the British press.