DIRS.INFO top alerts submit data jurnalism about API
login
Top related persons:
Prince Harry - 3 Peter Lane - 3 Harry - 3 Meghan - 3 — - 2 King Charles - 2 Shaheed Fatima - 2 James Eadie - 2
Top related locs:
Britain British California Paris New York London Southern California
Top related orgs:
London's - 2 Office - 2 The - 1 Metropolitan Police - 1 Thomson - 1

Search resuls for: "Peter Lane"


5 mentions found


☆ Prince Harry Loses Legal Challenge Over Security Downgrade
  + stars: | 2024-02-28 | by ( Mark Landler | ) www.nytimes.com   time to read: +1 min
Prince Harry lost a long-running legal battle over the downgrading of his security in Britain, as a High Court judge ruled on Wednesday that the British government was entitled to change the level of police protection for a member of the royal family who was no longer carrying out official duties. It was a stinging setback for Harry, who has waged a series of legal battles on both his security and privacy. Harry lost his automatic taxpayer-funded protection from the Metropolitan Police when he and his wife, Meghan, stepped back from royal duties in 2020, eventually relocating to Southern California. The prince has argued that he cannot safely visit Britain with his family without that higher level of protection. Last May, in a parallel legal case, he lost a bid to pay for police protection out of his own pocket.
Persons: Prince Harry, Peter Lane, Harry, Meghan Organizations: The, Metropolitan Police Locations: Britain, London, Southern California
☆ Prince Harry Challenges 'Unfair Treatment' Over UK Security in London Court
  + stars: | 2023-12-05 | by ( Dec. | At A.M. | ) www.usnews.com   time to read: +3 min
By Michael HoldenLONDON (Reuters) - Prince Harry has been subjected to "unlawful and unfair treatment" by the British government over the decision to take away his police protection when he is in Britain, his lawyer told London's High Court on Tuesday. Harry, along with other senior royals, had received full security protection provided by the state before he decided to step back from his royal duties and move to California with his American wife Meghan in 2020. Shaheed Fatima, the lawyer for Harry - who was not in court, said he had been subjected to unlawful and unfair treatment. She said the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as RAVEC, had not followed its own policy or treated Harry as it treated other figures. In May, the High Court ruled against Harry after he challenged the government's refusal to let him pay for his own police protection.
Persons: Michael Holden LONDON, Prince Harry, Harry, Meghan, —, King Charles, Shaheed Fatima, James Eadie, Peter Lane, Diana, Harry's, Michael Holden, Angus MacSwan Organizations: London's, Office Locations: British, Britain, California, Paris, New York
☆ Prince Harry challenges 'unfair treatment' over UK security in London court
  + stars: | 2023-12-05 | by ( Michael Holden | ) www.reuters.com   time to read: +3 min
LONDON, Dec 5 (Reuters) - Prince Harry has been subjected to "unlawful and unfair treatment" by the British government over the decision to take away his police protection when he is in Britain, his lawyer told London's High Court on Tuesday. Harry, along with other senior royals, had received full security protection provided by the state before he decided to step back from his royal duties and move to California with his American wife Meghan in 2020. Shaheed Fatima, the lawyer for Harry - who was not in court, said he had been subjected to unlawful and unfair treatment. She said the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as RAVEC, had not followed its own policy or treated Harry as it treated other figures. In May, the High Court ruled against Harry after he challenged the government's refusal to let him pay for his own police protection.
Persons: Prince Harry, Harry, Meghan, —, King Charles, Shaheed Fatima, James Eadie, Peter Lane, Diana, Harry's, Michael Holden, Angus MacSwan Organizations: London's, Office, Thomson Locations: British, Britain, California, Paris, New York
☆ UK's post-Brexit settlement scheme for EU citizens unlawful, London court rules
  + stars: | 2022-12-21 | by ( ) www.reuters.com   time to read: +2 min
[1/2] Small toy figures are seen in front of UK and European Union displayed flags in this illustration picture, October 17, 2019. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/IllustrationSummary Judge says government interpretation was "wrong in law"IMA citizens' rights body welcomes rulingBritish government to appealDec 21 (Reuters) - The British government's post-Brexit settlement scheme for EU citizens is unlawful, London's High Court ruled on Wednesday. He argued this aspect of the EU settlement scheme – and a similar scheme for citizens from the countries of the European Economic Area and the European Free Trade Association – was "straightforwardly incompatible with the withdrawal agreement". Judge Peter Lane ruled the British government's interpretation of the withdrawal agreement was "wrong in law" and the settlement scheme was unlawful. "The EU settlement scheme goes above and beyond our obligations under the withdrawal agreement, protecting EU citizens' rights and giving them a route to settlement in the UK.
☆ UK breaching Brexit agreement on EU citizens’ rights, London court told
  + stars: | 2022-11-01 | by ( Sam Tobin | ) www.reuters.com   time to read: +2 min
LONDON, Nov 1 (Reuters) - The British government is breaching the withdrawal agreement with the European Union by requiring EU citizens to reapply for the right to live and work in the United Kingdom, an independent body set up to oversee citizens’ rights told a London court on Tuesday. The Independent Monitoring Authority (IMA) says the Home Office’s post-Brexit settlement scheme unlawfully requires up to 2.6 million EU citizens to make a second application after being allowed to remain in the UK or lose their rights of residence. He said that this aspect of the EU settlement scheme – and a similar scheme for citizens from the countries of the European Economic Area and the European Free Trade Association – is “straightforwardly incompatible with the withdrawal agreement”. Palmer also said the European Commission, which has intervened in the case, supports the IMA’s interpretation of EU citizens’ rights under the withdrawal agreement. David Blundell, representing the Home Office, argued in court documents that the settlement scheme gives EU citizens “significantly more generous protection” than is required under the withdrawal agreement.
0 next >>
Total: 5