Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Search Warrants Ruled Unlawful by High Court

Thames Valley Police has accepted that search warrants used to raid Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's properties were unlawfully issued, after a High Court challenge brought by the former prince.

The force accepted that the original court decision to issue the warrants under the legal provision used was incorrect.

The warrants, issued in February, were used when police searched properties associated with Mountbatten-Windsor in Norfolk and Berkshire and seized documents and electronic devices.

The High Court has now quashed the warrants following the legal challenge.

However, the ruling does not bring the criminal investigation into Mountbatten-Windsor to an end.

What went wrong with the warrants?

The court heard that Thames Valley Police had applied for warrants under sections 8 and 9 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

The Central Criminal Court subsequently determined that section 8 warrants were appropriate and issued them on that basis.

A later legal challenge established that the warrants should instead have been issued under section 9.

Section 9 contains additional safeguards covering certain types of material, including documents connected with confidential business or professional activities.

The police have now accepted that the original court decision was legally incorrect.

Police accept legal error

Thames Valley Police said it accepted that the warrants must be quashed because the initial court decision had been made under the wrong legal provision.

However, the force stressed that this was a legal issue concerning the warrants and did not amount to a finding that its wider investigation was unlawful.

The force said it had presented the court with the information and paperwork it considered necessary and maintained that it had followed the legal process when applying for the warrants.

The question of what happens to the material seized during the searches remains before the courts.

The criminal investigation continues

Mountbatten-Windsor remains under investigation over allegations of misconduct in public office.

He was arrested by Thames Valley Police in February and has consistently denied wrongdoing.

The investigation followed the publication of documents by the US Department of Justice relating to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Among the allegations being examined is whether Mountbatten-Windsor passed confidential information to Epstein while serving as the UK's trade envoy.

No criminal finding has been made against Mountbatten-Windsor in relation to those allegations.

What happens to the seized material?

The police seized documents and electronic devices during the February searches.

The High Court's ruling means the original warrants cannot stand, but it does not automatically resolve the separate question of whether police can retain or use the material obtained during the searches.

Further legal proceedings will determine how that material is to be managed and whether Thames Valley Police can lawfully retain it as part of the investigation.

That could become an important next stage of the legal dispute.

A legal victory, but not the end of the investigation

The ruling represents a significant development in Mountbatten-Windsor's legal challenge.

His lawyers successfully established that the warrants were issued under the wrong statutory provision, while Thames Valley Police has accepted the legal error.

But the underlying criminal investigation remains active.

The court has not ruled that Mountbatten-Windsor is innocent of the allegations being investigated, nor has it determined that the wider police investigation must end.

Instead, the immediate legal issue concerns the validity of the warrants and what can lawfully happen to the material obtained through them.

For Mountbatten-Windsor, the High Court ruling is a significant development in his challenge to the police investigation — but the wider investigation itself continues.