The Charity Commission for England and Wales concluded its compliance case into Sentebale on 6 August 2025. It found administrative mismanagement involving unclear authority delegated to the charity’s chair and inadequate procedures for handling internal complaints. The regulator found no evidence of widespread or systemic bullying or harassment, or of over-reach by Prince Harry as patron. It criticized all parties for letting the dispute become public and required governance improvements.
What the Charity Commission investigated
The Commission opened a regulatory compliance case in April 2025 after concerns about relationships at Sentebale were raised with it in February. The dispute followed efforts begun in 2023 to implement a new fundraising strategy in the United States. The Commission’s stated remit was to assess whether current and former trustees, including the chair, had fulfilled their duties under charity law. It said it was not acting as a mediator or adjudicator of the internal dispute, and the case was not a statutory inquiry under section 46 of the Charities Act 2011. The original opening announcement is now marked withdrawn; the Commission’s later conclusion sets out its final findings.
What the regulator found
Unclear authority and delegation
The Commission found that delegating certain powers to the chair was confusing and poorly governed. The possibility of an “executive chair” role and unclear delegations over time contributed to misunderstandings about authority. It found no evidence that either the chair or the Duke of Sussex, as patron, had over-reached. The regulator also noted that a patron is not a trustee and does not share trustees’ legal duties.
Weak procedures for complaints
Trustees lacked adequate processes and policies for investigating internal complaints. The Commission concluded that unclear policies contributed to the charity’s failure to resolve disputes. It directed the current trustees to improve complaints and whistleblowing procedures and create an internal dispute policy.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →#1 Best Overall
Bullying and harassment claims
The Commission said it found no evidence of widespread or systemic bullying or harassment, including misogyny or misogynoir. It also acknowledged that several parties had a strong perception of ill treatment and that this had a personal impact. That finding is specifically about evidence of widespread or systemic conduct; it should not be read as a ruling that every individual allegation was investigated and dismissed.
Public handling of the dispute
The regulator was not satisfied that public statements to the media and criticism in television interviews served Sentebale’s best interests. It criticized all parties for allowing the dispute to play out publicly. David Holdsworth, the Commission’s chief executive, said the public dispute had damaged the charity’s reputation, risked overshadowing its achievements and jeopardized its ability to deliver for beneficiaries.
Rank #2
Trustee responsibility and wider pressures
The Commission assessed that all then-trustees contributed to a missed opportunity to resolve the issues. It also said strategic and financial difficulties following the Covid-19 pandemic contributed to tensions.
What the Commission required next
The Commission issued a Regulatory Action Plan and said it was monitoring Sentebale’s progress. The plan directed current trustees to:
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
- Implement an internal dispute policy.
- Improve complaints and whistleblowing procedures.
- Establish clearer processes for delegating authority.
- Secure sufficient funding to deliver services to beneficiaries.
These are regulatory requirements and priorities for the charity’s governance; they are separate from any determination of the parties’ personal accounts of the dispute. The Commission’s 6 August 2025 conclusion contains its findings and action plan.
Was Prince Harry cleared of bullying allegations?
Not in the sense of a court or regulator ruling on every individual allegation. The Commission reported no evidence of widespread or systemic bullying or harassment and no evidence of over-reach by Harry as patron. At the same time, it recognized several parties’ perception of ill treatment and found failures in the charity’s governance and complaint-handling arrangements. The precise conclusion is therefore narrower than saying that every allegation was disproved.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How the later defamation claim differs
In a separate development, The Guardian reported on 10 April 2026 that Sentebale had filed defamation papers in London’s High Court naming Prince Harry and former trustee Mark Dyer. The report said the filing date shown by HM Courts and Tribunals Service was 24 March 2026. Sentebale alleged a coordinated adverse media campaign; a spokesperson for Harry and Dyer categorically rejected the claims. The report described a pending claim, not a judgment, so those competing positions are allegations and denials rather than established findings. This civil claim is distinct from the Charity Commission’s completed compliance case. The Guardian’s report describes the filing and the parties’ positions.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors
