Ex-Prince Andrew Wins Court Battle Over Unlawful Police Searches But Still Faces Investigation

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has secured a legal victory after Thames Valley Police agreed to have search warrants for two of his properties quashed by the High Court in July 2026. However, the decision does not end the investigation into alleged misconduct in public office, and the legal position concerning material seized during the searches remains unresolved.

The warrants related to searches carried out in February at Wood Farm on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk and at Royal Lodge in Windsor, Berkshire.

Police searched both properties as part of an ongoing investigation involving Andrew, the former Duke of York. The court's decision concerned the legal basis for the warrants, not the merits of the allegations under investigation.

Judge Rules Warrants Unlawful but Inquiry Stays Alive

At a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in July, Mr Justice Hilliard confirmed that Andrew and Thames Valley Police had agreed that the search warrants were unlawful. Andrew did not attend the hearing.

The judge made clear that the outcome should not be interpreted as invalidating the entire investigation. He said that 'the fact that the search warrants were quashed does not bring an investigation to an end, or mean that the whole of the investigation was unlawful.'

That distinction is central to understanding the ruling. Although the warrants were quashed, the court's decision did not determine whether the underlying allegations were true or whether Andrew had committed an offence.

Thames Valley Police acknowledged that the original decision to issue the warrants had relied on an incorrect legal basis. The force said the agreement concerned the legal grounds used to authorise the searches, rather than the legitimacy of its wider investigation.

In its statement, the force said, 'We accept the position that the initial court's decision to issue warrants under the specific piece of legislation used was incorrect and therefore these must be legally quashed.'

The statement also said police had provided the court with the necessary information and paperwork and maintained that they had followed the correct legal processes throughout. The admission concerning the warrants should therefore not be presented as an admission that the entire investigation was unlawful.

Misconduct Inquiry Continues Despite Court Defeat for Police

The legal challenge follows Andrew's arrest on 19 February 2026, his 66th birthday. According to the supplied report, he was detained for 12 hours before being released on police bail. He has not been charged with an offence and has consistently denied wrongdoing.

Thames Valley Police did not identify Andrew by name in its statement. Instead, the force described the subject of its investigation as a man in his 60s from Norfolk.

The police statement confirmed that the investigation into alleged misconduct in public office remained active. It also stressed that the agreement over the warrants should not be mistaken for a judgement on the inquiry itself.

'The agreement that led to the quashing of the warrants relates specifically to a decision made by the court regarding the legal basis for these and is not a judgement on our ongoing investigation,' the force said.

The wording keeps the wider investigation separate from the legal dispute over the searches. Andrew's successful challenge does not establish his innocence or guilt in relation to the allegations, and the continuing police inquiry is not evidence that he has committed an offence.

Fate of Seized Material Still Before the Courts

A further question concerns material collected during the searches of the two properties. Thames Valley Police said legal proceedings were ongoing to determine how the seized material would be managed and whether the force could lawfully retain it in support of its investigation.

That issue remains unresolved in the supplied account. The warrants being quashed does not, by itself, establish that the material has been excluded from consideration, returned to Andrew or ruled inadmissible.

The force said it would continue pursuing reasonable lines of inquiry to progress the investigation fairly and effectively. It declined to comment further while the related legal proceedings remained ongoing.

The immediate outcome is therefore limited but significant. The warrants have been quashed because the legal basis used to issue them was incorrect, while the investigation into alleged misconduct in public office continues.

The next stage will concern the legal handling of the material seized during the searches and whether police can lawfully retain it as their inquiries proceed.