Image source, Reuters

Harry has lost his latest court battle against the Home Office over changes to his security arrangements since stepping back as a working royal.

Over the last hours, we reported that the Court of Appeal has upheld a previous ruling, supporting the government's decision to decide Harry's security on a case-by-case basis.

Judge Geoffrey Vos said Harry's arguments were "powerful", but found there was not enough legal basis for a challenge.

Harry has said his security has been a factor in not bringing Meghan and their family back to the UK. But, after today's ruling, the Home Office called their security system "rigorous" and "proportionate".

In an exclusive interview with the BBC, Harry said he is "devastated" by the decision.

"I can't see a world in which I would bring my wife and children back to the UK at this point."

We'll be ending our live coverage soon, but you can read more about the judgement and the interview in our news stories.

As mentioned, Prince Harry has given an exclusive interview to the BBC after losing a legal challenge over his security in the UK.

You can watch it by pressing the Watch live button above.

Sean Coughlan
Royal correspondent

The Duke of Sussex says he wants "reconciliation" with the rest of the Royal Family, in an emotional interview, in which he said he was "devastated" about losing a legal challenge over his security in the UK.

At present Prince Harry said he was cut off from his father King Charles, in a BBC News interview in California.

"He won't speak to me because of this security stuff," the prince said, adding he didn't know how long the King had left to live.

Prince Harry spoke to the BBC in the aftermath of losing an appeal over the levels of security he and his family are entitled to while in the UK.

Read more from Harry's interview here.

Nada Tawfik's interview with Prince Harry after the announcement of his appeal verdict is now live across the BBC.

The duke says that he felt "let down" and described his court defeat as a "good old fashioned establishment stitch up" and blamed the Royal Household for influencing the decision to reduce his security.

You can read what Harry had to say following the verdict here.

Apart from Ravec, another term we've heard today is the Risk Management Board.

What is it and what does it do?

• As we've reported, the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec), decides on security arrangements for royals and VIPs
• The Risk Management Board (RMB) is the specialist group that gives Ravec expert threat assessments
• The RMB carries out risk analysis on individuals to decide what level of security they need
• Although the RMB did analyse risk for the Duke of Sussex before his security was downgraded, the judge today says the board "would have nothing to say" about the need for security on any future uncertain visits

Image source, Getty Images

Today we’ve mentioned Ravec quite a bit, but what actually is it?

According to the government, Ravec – the Royal and VIP Executive Committee – includes people from the Home Office, Cabinet Office, Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, Metropolitan Police, and the Royal Household.

Its job is to decide security arrangements for royals and VIPs.

Ravec previously decided that Prince Harry should get a “bespoke” arrangement for his publicly-funded security when he’s in the UK. This is because, after stepping back from royal duties, he was no longer entitled to the same level of protection as working royals.

Harry objected to this decision, which is why we have the court case.

Prince Harry is giving his reaction to the court's decision in an exclusive interview with the BBC's Nada Tawfik near his home in Santa Barbara, California.

We will bring you that interview later.

Tom Symonds
Correspondent

A Home Office spokesperson says: “We are pleased that the court has found in favour of the government’s position in this case.

“The UK government’s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate. 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.”

A row which seemed to become emblem of Harry's sense of exclusionpublished at 15:41 British Summer Time

15:41 BST

Sean Coughlan
Royal correspondent

This has always seemed a very personal dispute for Harry, not just about security but about his sense of belonging and his relationship with his family and the country of his birth.

He has said that concern about a lack of security has been an important reason not to bring his wife Meghan and their two children back to the UK.

The argument over security seemed to become a wider emblem for his sense of exclusion and unfair treatment, after stepping down as a working royal.

So even though this has been a protracted and often complex courtroom battle, it has also been another part of the royal drama of a divided family.

The judge recognised this, saying that Harry clearly “felt badly treated by the system”.

But he found that such a sense of grievance did not add up to a sufficient legal challenge.

Image source, Reuters

As we've just reported, Prince Harry still has one option if he wants his security status restored to what it was when he was a full-time working royal - he could take his case to the Supreme Court.

But what does that mean?

• The Supreme Court is the UK's highest court for appeals in both criminal and civil cases
• It hears appeals "on arguable points of law of general public importance" for the whole of the UK in civil cases, and for England, Wales and Northern Ireland in criminal cases
• As an appeal court, external, it can't consider a case unless a lower court has already made a relevant order

So, Harry can keep challenging the security committee Ravec's decision, but he needs permission to do so.

If that's refused, he could still write to the Supreme Court to ask for permission to take his case further.

Image source, Getty Images

The Court of Appeal's judgement today will be "hugely disappointing for Prince Harry", a royal commentator says.

Speaking to the BBC News channel, Afua Hagan says the duke will be disappointed at losing his appeal.

"He feels that it's not safe for them to travel with him, and that means he probably won't come back to the UK with his family for the foreseeable future," she says.

Hagan adds there is a possibility Harry could take his appeal even further by taking it to the Supreme Court – but he would need permission from the High Court to do that.

A full copy of the appeal judgement has now been published on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website, external.

Earlier, Sir Geoffrey Vos summed up the written judgement in the comments we've shared with you.

However, he stressed that the full judgement is the "authoritative" one.

As we've been reporting, the appeal judges backed the decision of the Ravec (Royal and VIP Executive Committee) chair – which means Harry's appeal has been dismissed.

Image source, Reuters

Although Prince Harry wasn't in court today, he did attend both days of last month's appeal against the ruling.

His barrister, Shaheed Fatima KC, said his safety, security and life were "at stake", and told the judges the "human dimension" of the case should not be forgotten.

As we've mentioned, a short while ago, the judge said the arguments from the prince's barrister were "powerful and moving", and that it was "plain that the duke felt badly treated by the system".

But the judge added: "I concluded, having studied the detail of the extensive documentation, I could not say that the duke's sense of grievance translated into a legal argument."

Image source, Elizabeth Cook

As we've reported, Sir Geoffrey Vos has just delivered his judgement, rejecting Prince Harry's appeal against the High Court decision that found Ravec's (Royal and VIP Executive Committee) changes to his security arrangements were lawful.

Here's a summary of what he said:

• Sir Geoffrey Vos called the arguments put forward for Harry as "powerful", and said it was clear Harry felt badly treated by the system
• However, he found there was no legal basis to challenge Ravec's decision to alter Harry's security
• Sir Geoffrey Vos said Ravec's chair hadn't followed policy, but the judges acknowledged that he had "good reason to depart" from its policy document
• He added that the Risk Management Board "would have nothing to say" on the need for security on future uncertain visits

"The conclusion in my judgement [...] was that the Duke of Sussex's appeal would be dismissed," Sir Geoffrey Vos concluded.

Summing up in court, Sir Geoffrey Vos says the chair of Ravec (Royal VIP and Executive Committee), Richard Mottram - who makes decisions about security for senior royals - did not follow the policy.

But the judges says Ravec has "good reason to depart" from its policy document.

The Court of Appeal verdict listed why they think so:

• Ravec policy was "inward facing and unpublished", and concerned an area of national importance
• The court had considerable respect for Richard and Ravec, who have "unrivalled" experience in royal protection
• The Risk Management Board would not carry out further risk analyses because these were no longer needed, given the new arrangements
• Richard and Ravec gave compelling reasons for their decision

Tom Symonds
Reporting from the Court of Appeal

Geoffrey Vos adds: "Even if there had been a risk analysis from the Risk Management Board, it would very likely have only confirmed the threat, vulnerability and impact levels which the Duke of Sussex had faced when earlier risk analyses were undertaken.

"But it would have had nothing to say on the critical features of the changed situation, namely the need for protective security on future uncertain visits and the Government's appetite for risk."

The Risk Management Board carried out an assessment of threats against Prince Harry while he was a full working royal.

The prince argued that this should have been repeated once he had stepped back from royal duties.

Tom Symonds
Reporting from the Court of Appeal

More now as three senior judges at the Court of Appeal reject Prince Harry's appeal over his security arrangements.

Sir Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls says: "I concluded, having studied the detailed documents, I could not say the duke's sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for a challenge to Ravec's [Royal and VIP Executive Committee] decision."

At a previous hearing, Harry argued that Home Office officials "singled him out" for "unjustified and inferior treatment" when deciding the level of protection he should get in the UK.

When Harry took a step back from royal duties in 2020 a Home Office committee decided he would no longer get the level of personal protection provided by the police for senior royals.

Instead, in a bespoke arrangement, his security cover would be decided on a case-by-case basis.

Tom Symonds
Reporting from the Court of Appeal

The Duke of Sussex has lost the latest stage of his court battle for his personal security to be provided by the police.

Sir Geoffrey Vos begins by explaining that the Court of Appeal had to decide if the previous judge was right to dismiss Prince Harry's claim.

He mentions that part of the two-day hearing last month was held in private, and the media couldn't report on it, because it involved security arrangements.

Today's judgement will be public, though, and a full copy of it will be published.