Prince Harry is facing a bill of 1 million. GBP after he ‘handily’ lost his High Court battle with the Home Office to downgrade his police protection as he and Meghan left royal life

Prince Harry was today ordered to reimburse taxpayers after losing his High Court battle with the Home Office to downgrade his police protection.

He potentially faces a bill of around £1m when his own legal costs are taken into account.

A judge rejected a bid to halve the amount he had to pay, saying the Duke of Sussex had ‘comprehensively lost’ his case.

Separately, Sir Peter Lane also rejected the Duke’s application to appeal the ruling, describing part of it as ‘frankly hopeless’.

Harry, who has previously vowed to appeal the case, can still go directly to the Court of Appeal if he wishes to pursue it.

The twin verdicts are another legal blow for the duke after he lost his two-year battle at the Home Office in February.

Harry had taken the Home Office to court because he no longer received the ‘same level’ of protection after he and Meghan left royal life and the UK in January 2020.

He had compared the dangers to him and his family to the risks his mother, Princess Diana, faced before her death in 1997 while being chased by paparazzi.

The Home Office spent more than £500,000 of public money fighting the case. After he lost, Harry’s lawyers argued in written submissions that he should only pay more than half of the public’s legal costs.

But Sir Peter stated: “I have no doubt that the claimant’s contention that his costs liability should be subject to a 50-60% reduction cannot be supported.” He added “for the avoidance of doubt” that the Duke’s suggestion that his case had been “partially successful” was “without merit”.

The judge agreed with Harry’s lawyers that the Home Office had committed certain breaches of legal rules, but said these “did not change the fact that the claimant lost completely”.

Sir Peter ordered the Duke to pay 90 per cent of the public’s legal bill. The exact amount was not specified.

But figures released via a freedom of information request a few weeks ago revealed the government had so far spent £514,128, including more than £180,000 on lawyers, £320,000 on government legal department lawyers and £2,300 in court fees.

Harry’s own legal costs have not been disclosed but could be similar.

Prince Harry, right, and wife Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, arrive at the Royal Salute Polo Challenge 2024 in aid of Sentebale on April 12, 2024

The judge also rejected Harry’s request for leave to appeal, saying his application was ‘pretty much a recap’ of the case he had already lost.

He said there were ‘no compelling reasons’ to allow an appeal to proceed. Sir Peter said that just because the case concerned ‘protection of life’, Harry did not provide a compelling reason, because otherwise ‘there would be a large number’ of appeals to the immigration courts under the Refugee Convention.

After the earlier ruling in February, a spokesman for the Duke said he intended to appeal the sentence, adding that Harry ‘hopes he will get justice from the Court of Appeal’.

Prince Harry continues to insist that the withdrawal of guaranteed police protection leaves him vulnerable when he visits the UK.

He is required to give 30 days notice of any travel plans so that each visit can be assessed on its merits. Sources close to him have been quoted as saying he is not willing to get back with Meghan or their children without the level of security he feels he needs.

Harry was given a 10 percent discount on his legal costs after the judge penalized the government for a delay in providing key documents about Ravec’s work.

Sources close to him have been quoted as saying he is not willing to get back with Meghan or their children without the level of security he feels he needs. Pictured: Harry and Meghan at a polo event on Friday

Ravec is the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalties and Public Persons, which comes under the Ministry of Interior and oversees security arrangements for the Royal Family and other VIPS.

Sir Peter said the Home Office had not acted in bad faith but its failure to provide the Duke with the information was “punishable”.

However, the judge felt it was ‘frankly hopeless’ for Harry’s lawyers to have suggested the court ‘shouldn’t be afforded ‘respect’ for Ravec’s decision-making because the subject matter involved the protection of an individual.

The judge also revealed that Harry had been forced to apologize for breaching confidentiality rules in his own case.

The Duke shared private information from the High Court case with MP and veterans minister Johnny Mercer, who has long shared a bond with the Prince.

Sir. Justice Lane revealed how during the sensitive case the Duke had ‘breached the terms of the confidentiality ring order by emailing certain information to a partner of Schillings who was not in the confidentiality ring and to the Rt Hon Johnny Mercer MP’.

He said the breach had been quickly discovered by Harry’s own lawyers, who alerted the court. The judge said: ‘The complainant has apologised.’

The Home Office said: “While we are satisfied with the court’s decision to refuse leave to appeal, it would be inappropriate to comment further on ongoing legal proceedings.”