Former Prince Andrew asks U.K. court to throw out Epstein-related search warrants for his homes

London — Disgraced former Prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has launched a legal challenge over search warrants for his royal homes that were issued before his February arrest, Britain's judiciary confirmed Monday.

The judiciary confirmed that the U.K. High Court was to hold a private hearing on Thursday, as King Charles III's brother challenges Thames Valley Police over the searches carried out in Windsor, west of London, and Sandringham, in eastern England.

The force arrested Andrew on his 66th birthday on Feb. 19 on suspicion of misconduct in public office, related to his links to the late U.S. sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Andrew was released the same day after hours of police questioning, but remained under investigation. He has denied all wrongdoing in his associations with the disgraced American financier.

His shock arrest prompted Charles to issue a statement insisting "the law must take its course."

The Daily Telegraph reported the legal challenge late on Sunday. The newspaper noted it was the first time a member of Britain's royal family has challenged the lawfulness of criminal proceedings against them since the trial of Charles I in 1649.

It said Andrew's legal team wanted to examine whether the search warrants granted by a judge at London's Old Bailey court — formally known as the Central Criminal Court — were lawful.

Andrew's legal team did not immediately respond to an AFP request for comment.

Andrew's effort to have court "quash search warrants"

The judiciary's press office said "the case concerns an application by Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor for a judicial review to quash search warrants issued by a judge at the Central Criminal Court on 18 February 2026."

If the review were to throw out the warrants, it would potentially deprive prosecutors handling the case of any evidence discovered during the searches of the former prince's homes.

Andrew's arrest and the police searches marked a new low for the royal, who was stripped of his royal titles last year and ousted from his Windsor home over his Epstein connections. The government has even mulled passing a law to remove him from the royal line of succession.

Scandal has engulfed the king's younger brother since one of Epstein's accusers, Virginia Giuffre, claimed in her posthumous memoirs that she had been trafficked three times to have sex with Andrew when she was a teenager. Giuffre died last year by suicide at the age of 41.

The former prince has repeatedly denied the claims. He settled a U.S. civil lawsuit in 2022 brought by Giuffre while not admitting liability.

The Thames Valley Police probe follows new revelations from documents relating to the American financier released by the United States earlier this year, including emails in which Andrew appeared to share potentially confidential information with him.

"Investigation into misconduct in public office continues"

In one November 2010 email released by the U.S. government, Andrew appeared to share with the U.S. financier reports on his visit to several Asian countries. Two years earlier, Epstein had been convicted in the United States of procuring a child for prostitution.

At least nine British police forces confirmed they were looking into claims — some related to Andrew — stemming from the batch of some 3 million Epstein files released by the U.S. authorities in January.

However, the Thames Valley investigation appears to be the most advanced. Its officers, who swooped on the remote Sandringham royal estate in eastern England to detain Andrew, searched his home there and his former Royal Lodge residence in Windsor, west of London.

The raid in Windsor lasted six days.

In response to Andrew's legal challenge, Thames Valley Police said in a statement that its "investigation into misconduct in public office continues."

"We are engaged in legal proceedings in relation to warrants previously obtained," it added. "As these legal proceedings are currently ongoing, it would be inappropriate for us to comment further."