The former Prince Andrew has scored a major legal victory after police admitted that the search warrants used to raid his two homes earlier this year were unlawful.
On Thursday 8 October 2026, Thames Valley Police accepted that the legal basis used by the High Court judge who issued the warrants in February 2026 was not correct. The warrants have been quashed on a legal technicality after it emerged they were applied for under the wrong part of the relevant law.
The raids targeted two properties: one on the royal family's Sandringham estate in Norfolk, and Andrew's longtime residence, Royal Lodge in Windsor. The searches followed the dramatic arrest of the 66-year-old on his birthday, 19 February 2026, on suspicion of misconduct in public office amid renewed scrutiny of his ties to the late Jeffrey Epstein.
Material seized during the searches is still being held by police, who said they are arguing over a legal point about 'whether we can lawfully retain it in support of our ongoing investigation'. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, as King Charles's brother is known after his royal titles were stripped last year, had launched a judicial review challenging the warrants, claiming that authorities removed 'private and confidential material' not connected to the investigation.
The legal win has reportedly divided the royal family. An insider told royal publicist Rob Shuter that King Charles 'privately believes Andrew has every right to challenge the warrants if he thinks they were improperly obtained', while insisting the King will stay completely out of the fight publicly. Prince William, by contrast, is said to be furious about his uncle's decision to take legal action against the police.
The February arrest sent shockwaves through Britain, coming amid the ongoing fallout from the Epstein affair that has shadowed the former duke for years. Andrew has consistently denied wrongdoing. His legal team questioned the background that led to the granting of the warrants, which were issued by a High Court judge at the Central Criminal Court in London on 18 February, the day before the arrest.
The quashing of the warrants does not end the underlying investigation. Prosecutors will now have to decide how to proceed with material that may or may not be lawfully retainable. For Andrew, however, the ruling is a rare victory in a saga that has cost him his titles, his public role and his reputation. For the police, it is an embarrassing admission that the highest-profile search warrants of the year were built on a flawed legal foundation.