Prince Harry arrives at London court to win back UK police protection

move to Montecito, Calif. in 2020 — but wife Meghan Markle doesn’t want to make amends with the Royals.

The Royal Family will be gathering in Sandringham to celebrate Christmas together, but Prince Harry and Meghan Markle won't be joining in on the fun.

“Gilded Youth: An Intimate History of Growing Up in the Royal Family,” told the Daily Express.The royals typically spend Christmas at Sandringham House, however, the Sussexes have been absent from celebrations for the last three years.Instead, they spent the festive season in their $14 million Montecito mansion with their two children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.Quinn notes that as the furor over Omid Scobie’s explosive tell-all biography, “Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy’s Fight for Survival” continues to unfold, a royal reunion is off the table at this time.“I don’t think Harry and Meghan will be able to overshadow Kate and William this Christmas, or at least not in the UK,” he told the outlet.

bombshell memoir “Spare” hit the bookshelves this past January — just months before “The Crown” dropped its sixth and final season.Now, actor Dominic West — who played Prince (Now King) Charles on the Netflix royal drama — has revealed that he ran to pick up a copy of the autobiography once it came out.The British star, 54, divulged that he used the Duke of Sussex’s words to impact his performance on the show — calling the book a “gift.”“I bought it immediately, and I think it did slightly affect the way we played that key scene where he wakes Harry up,” the “Wire” actor explained to Variety recently.He went on: “I’ve been reading every newspaper article or journalistic article on him since I got the job.” “In a way, this was a gift that he was in the headlines every day when he was becoming king — like getting irritated by the fountain pen,” West said. “In the cold, formal exterior of this guy, I tried to get those little tells.”The “Affair” alum noted that “Spare” heavily influenced his acting in one particular scene of “The Crown” — the moment where Charles informed Harry that his mother Princess Diana died in 1997 in the early hours of the morning.The “Invictus Games” founder penned in his book about the tragedy: “Pa didn’t hug me.

appeared as the star witness at the trial in June – had sued Mirror Group Newspapers, the publisher of the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People.Harry and about 100 other claimants – including actors, sports stars, celebrities and people who simply had a connection to high-profile figures – have taken legal action over allegations of phone-hacking and unlawful information-gathering between 1991 and 2011.Harry said he was targeted by MGN for 15 years from 1996 and that more than 140 stories which appeared in its papers were the result of unlawful information gathering, though the trial only considered 33 of these.“I found that 15 out of the 33 articles that were tried were the product of phone hacking of his mobile phone or the mobile phones of his associates, or the product of other unlawful information gathering,” Judge Timothy Fancourt said.“I consider that his phone was only hacked to a modest extent, and that this was probably carefully controlled by certain people at each newspaper.”The judge concluded there had been widespread hacking and unlawful activities at the paper of which senior executives were aware, although nearly all those on the board of the company had not been told.MGN, owned by Reach had argued the accusations were not supported by the evidence.“We welcome today’s judgment that gives the business the necessary clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago,” an MGN spokesperson said.“Where historical wrongdoing took place, we apologize unreservedly, have taken full responsibility and paid appropriate compensation.”

Rumours persist that Prince Harry is keen to reunite with his family this Christmas, as well as start to introduce his two young children - Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet - to the royal traditions he grew up with. Despite now living full-time in the US, the couple confirmed they wished for their children - who are sixth and seventh in line to the throne - to be styled as a Prince and a Princess and not miss out on their "birth right" as grandchildren of the monarch.

The final series of The Crown drops today (14 December) and a royal expert has explained this could be "triggering" for Prince Harry with the idea that he "lived in the shadows" as it focuses on Prince William. Part one of season six of Netflix's The Crown launched on the streaming platform in the UK on Thursday, 16 November, depicting the relationship between Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed before their fateful car journey. Fans of the show have had to wait a little longer for the second part of the final series which was released today.

told the Express.“Financial penalties or contractual repercussions tied to their titles within existing contracts could amount to millions, particularly if lucrative commercial deals are affected to the tune of millions a year in lost income should the worst happen, and the Sussexes lose their royal titles.”Boardman said that if Harry and Meghan’s royal titles are taken away from them, their standing in society would be “significantly” impacted.“While some may view it positively as a move towards independence, others may see it negatively as a departure from tradition,” he warned.“Meghan Markle’s popularity in the US is more likely influenced by factors beyond royal titles, such as her individual achievements and personal qualities, but the royal family turmoil would make headlines leading to a decline in popularity which could take years to recover from.”While the couple, who wed in 2018, retain their respective Sussex titles, they can no longer use their defunct HRH titles.Since quitting royal life in 2020, the couple settled down in Montecito, Calif., where they have remained since.The runaway royals sat down for a bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, followed by the release of their six-part Netflix documentary, as well as Harry’s protocol-shattering memoir, “Spare.”The projects, in which they made bombshell revelations about the Firm, were followed by a lucrative Spotify.They signed a $20 million-plus deal between their Archewell Audio and the streaming giant in 2020.And in 2021, the pair had signed an estimated $100 million contract with Netflix.

failed court challenge in a libel lawsuit.The Duke of Sussex is suing Associated Newspapers Ltd. over an article that said Harry tried to hide his efforts to retain publicly funded protection in the UK after leaving his role as a working member of the royal family.Justice Matthew Nicklin ruled Friday in the High Court in London that the publisher has a “real prospect” of showing that statements issued on Harry’s behalf were misleading and that the February 2022 article reflected an “honest opinion” and wasn’t libelous.“The defendant may well submit that this was a masterclass in the art of ‘spinning,’” Nicklin wrote, in refusing to strike the honest opinion defense.Harry has claimed the article was “fundamentally inaccurate” and the newspaper defamed him when it suggested he lied in his initial public statements over efforts to challenge the government’s decision to strip him of his security detail after he and his family moved to the US in 2020.Harry, 39, the younger son of King Charles III, also has a lawsuit pending against the government’s decision to protect him on a case-by-case basis when he visits Britain.

As news of Prince Harry's potential return to the UK hit headlines, one friend of Prince William and Kate has revealed that if the prince did move back to England, it would 'go down like a bucket of warm sick'.

libel case against the Mail on Sunday newspaper over an article about his security arrangements must go to trial, a judge at London’s High Court ruled on Friday, rejecting the royal’s attempts to have the publisher’s defense thrown out.Harry, King Charles’ younger son, sued publisher Associated Newspapers last year over an article that stated he had tried to keep secret a separate legal fight with the British government over his publicly funded police protection, which was withdrawn after he stepped back from royal duties in 2020.The report also accused Harry of attempting to mislead the public about his willingness to pay for the policing himself.Harry applied to have the newspaper group’s defense thrown out, but Judge Matthew Nicklin said in a written ruling that it had a real prospect of success.The judge added in a summary of his ruling: “The Duke of Sussex’s claim will now go through its remaining pre-trial phases and, unless resolved in some other way, to a trial at some point in 2024.”

strip him of taxpayer-funded police security when he visits Britain should be overturned.“The UK is my home,” read Harry’s witness statement prepared for the trial. “The UK is central to the heritage of my children and a place I want them to feel at home as much as where they live at the moment in the US.”“That cannot happen if it’s not possible to keep them safe when they are on UK soil,” he added.Fatima read out a portion of Harry’s statement at the hearing, denouncing the ruling previously made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures when he and Markle, 42, walked away from the monarchy in 2020.“I cannot put my wife in danger like that and, given my experiences in life, I am reluctant to unnecessarily put myself in harm’s way too,” the Duke’s statement explained, alluding to the tragic death of his mother Princess Diana from a car crash in 1997.

Prince Harry claims his children cannot “feel at home” in the UK if it is “not possible to keep them safe” there, the High Court has heard. In a written witness statement prepared for his legal challenge against the Home Office over a change to his security arrangements when visiting, Harry, 39, said he and his wife Meghan Markle, 42, had been “forced” to leave the country in 2020.

three-day hearing in London kicked off on Thursday and while the red-headed royal was not in attendance, his attorney, Shaheed Fatima, argued against a decision made in February 2020 to strip him of taxpayer-funded police security when he visits Britain. The decision, made by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (RAVEC), occurred when he and his wife Meghan Markle stepped down as “working royals.”“This case is about the right to safety and security of a person.

A conservative member of U.K.’s Parliament promised to introduce a bill that would strip Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their royal titles. Bob Seely blamed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for the latest royal racism controversy following the publication of "Endgame" by Omid Scobie.The Dutch version of the royal tell-all was recently pulled from shelves in Holland after reports surfaced claiming the copy identified the name of an allegedly racist royal.

since leaving the royal family in 2020 and moving to Montecito, Calif.However, a public relations expert has given his take as to why the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have seemingly stalled in building up their media empire. The duo’s Spotify “Archetypes” podcast was canceled earlier this year and the couple have frequently been in the headlines for dissing their UK-based relatives.

Royal author Omid Scobie has claimed that the Royal Family were advised not to trust Prince Harry after the release of his tell-all book Spare and after a "frosty" conversation between the father and son took place. Omid's "explosive" new book Endgame was released on 28 November.

“Endgame,” obtained by Page Six ahead of its publication next week, the Princess Royal, 73, was “at the forefront of the supporters of the firm approach” taken by Buckingham Palace to boot the royal couple from the residence. According to the explosive tome, an eviction notice was delivered to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex via Sir Michael John Stevens, the Keeper of the Privy Purse.Harry, 39, and Markle, 42, moved to Montecito, Calif in 2020 and had used Frogmore as their U.K.

“slimmed-down” monarchy seems to be in a crisis ever since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made their grand exit from the royal family in 2020.According to expert Gareth Russell, the couple’s departure has made it “very difficult” for them to come back into the royal family fold and take on engagements on behalf of Charles, 75.“Buckingham Palace could not have been any more clear than the initial announcement in 2020 of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex leaving, that the royal household would be quite willing or quite eager to have [them] back at some time in the future,” the commentator told GB News recently.When the Invictus Games founder, 39, and the former actress, 42, opted to leave the Firm at the time, they released a statement saying: “We intend to step back as ‘senior’ members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen.”“The Palace” author added that in 2020, Charles still “hoped” that “one day” Harry and Markle “would want to come back to work again.”He continued: “Unfortunately what has happened in the two or three years since that announcement has made it very difficult.”“In 2023, the monarchy was never intended to be functioning without the Duke of Sussex,” Russell said. “The King had always, I think, intended to have both of his sons and their spouses whoever they may be senior working royals.”When the former Prince of Wales ascended to the British throne in September 2022 upon the death of his mother, Queen Elizabeth, he noted a desire to shrink the family to having just seven key senior members taking on major royal responsibilities.

A new book claims Prince Harry begged his father King Charles to be allowed to keep using Frogmore Cottage ahead of their eviction from the Windsor estate home earlier this year.