Prince William hires Princess Diana’s lawyers—but why?

the future king is “striking out on his own" ...but the optics tell a more complicated story

There’s been a quiet but meaningful shakeup behind palace doors. And it involves lawyers.

Last week, it was reported that Prince William has hired the law firm Mishcon de Reya—the same firm that represented his mother, Princess Diana, during her divorce from then-Prince Charles. This marks a notable departure from tradition: senior royals, including William in the past, have typically relied on the Firm’s go-to legal team at Harbottle & Lewis.

So, the obvious question arises: why does Prince William need his own lawyers?

Fear not, the photos and videos of a loved-up Will and Kate aren’t going anywhere. There’s currently no public legal dispute afoot, but like many royals, the current Prince of Wales likely has ongoing legal needs related to privacy, press intrusion, contracts for public engagements, and charitable ventures.

And this decision being made public speaks volumes about William’s long-term vision for the Firm.

Queen Elizabeth II and King Charles’s legal teams, Gerrard Tyrrell and Harbottle & Lewis, have long represented the monarch’s personal and institutional interests, as well as those of their family. Understandably, their loyalty is to the Crown.

So Prince William opting to leave that established orbit and instead retain Mishcon de Reya—the firm that famously represented Princess Diana in her 1996 divorce—is bound to draw attention. And maybe that was the point.

Princess Diana leaving the Mishcon de Reya headquarters in the 1990s.

At face value, the move is being framed as William “striking out on his own.” A source told Richard Eden (James Middleton’s preferred hawker of dog food): “William wanted to strike out on his own. He did not want to continue using his father's lawyers. It’s as simple as that. He wants to be his own man.” Another source, described as a “friend,” echoed the point: “William wants to do things differently from his father and wants to be seen to do them differently.”

Eden also notes that William’s desire to “shake up” the status quo at the Palace was “made clear in 2023” when he “chose to give a major interview to a national newspaper that was published the day after Trooping the Colour.” Eden opines, “It meant that coverage of the King’s first birthday parade was overshadowed by his heir’s declaration that he planned to end homelessness.”

But how much of a break is this…really?

William could have hired any number of high-powered solicitors to signal independence. Fiona Shackleton**, for instance, represented then-Prince Charles during the Wales divorce as well as Prince Andrew in his divorce from Sarah Ferguson…and remains a top-tier royal legal mind. She even attended Harry and Meghan’s wedding in 2018, and just last year was retained by William’s own uncle, Charles Spencer, in his divorce from Karen Spencer.

Fiona Shackleton attending the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex at St George's Chapel, Windsor in 2018.

Yet William chose Mishcon de Reya, tying his legal affairs more directly to his mother’s enduring legacy.

It’s hard not to see this move as both strategic and symbolic. The choice of Diana’s old firm helps to reinforce the public image of William as her son—a future king who embodies her values of compassion, independence, and quiet resilience. And William knew this news would become public. Almost instantly, it became a Mail+ exclusive, locked behind a paywall.

This wasn’t just a private legal matter, it was a narrative move…and a money-making one.

Who benefits from the story being out there?

Well, certainly not Buckingham Palace, who might prefer a united front. But William does. It positions him as distinct from Charles without requiring any actual confrontation or action. And in a post-Megxit world, that distinction matters. By aligning himself (even subtly) with Diana’s moral authority, William shores up his own popularity at a time when the monarchy is on shakier footing than ever before.

Whether it’s a genuine assertion of independence or a polished piece of palace PR, the takeaway is the same: every move by a senior royal—especially one involving lawyers—is rarely just about legal strategy. It’s about legacy, loyalty, and the long game of public perception.

William is not the only Windsor son to take this path

Prince Harry, of course, has also opted for legal counsel outside of the royal fold. In his lawsuits against British media outlets, Harry is represented by David Sherborne, a high-profile barrister known for his work on privacy and libel cases (he was Lead Counsel for the victims of press intrusion during the Leveson Inquiry). Sherbourne also represented the late Princess Diana and, more recently, took on the Duchess of Sussex as a client during her action related to misuse of private information and copyright infringement against Associated Newspapers.

Prince Harry and David Sherbourne, leaving the Mirror Group phone hacking trial in June 2023.

It’s been reported that no less than Sir Elton John personally recommended Sherborne to the Sussexes—a reminder of how closely the pair rely on their own trusted network rather than palace-approved advisors.

It’s also worth noting that Harry’s legal cases have often been undertaken expressly against his family’s wishes. In Spare and other public statements, Harry has revealed that King Charles, Prince William, and palace staff actively discouraged him from speaking out about the abuse that Meghan faced in the early days of their relationship. The family and firm, allegedly, went so far as to call his quest to hold the media accountable a “suicide mission.” It makes sense, then, that Harry would turn to outside counsel.

In both cases, the brothers are choosing legal teams that represent their personal priorities. But the context matters. Harry’s legal fights have come at great personal and institutional cost. William, on the other hand, remains firmly within the royal system—and will always benefit from it. His choice of lawyer may be tipped as a bold departure, but it also draws directly from his mother’s legacy. To me, it reads as a symbolic gesture that invites sympathy without open defiance.

“Two queens stand before me…”

And William has said as much out loud. In November 2024, the Prince of Wales told the BBC, “I'm trying to do [monarchy] differently…for my generation. And to give you more an understanding around it, I'm doing it with maybe a smaller 'R' in the royal, if you like, that's maybe a better way of saying it.”

So, whether you see these legal choices as subtle acts of self-preservation or carefully curated signals for the public, one thing is clear: both sons of Diana are still shaping their roles in her shadow—and they’re lawyering up on their own terms.

---

**In 2008, Fiona Shackleton—nicknamed the "Steel Magnolia" for her mix of charm and ruthlessness—represented Paul McCartney during his high-profile divorce from Heather Mills. Mills, who was representing herself for part of the proceedings, became increasingly frustrated during negotiations. At one point, in a fit of anger, she reportedly dumped a jug of water over Shackleton’s head in court.

Shackleton, ever composed, is said to have calmly asked for a towel and carried on. Her office gave no comment on the incident, but pictures from the courthouse show her arriving to court that morning with a bouncy blonde bouffant…and leaving at around 2 p.m. with “damp locks slicked back behind her ears.”

The moment instantly became tabloid fodder and only added to Shackleton’s reputation as a formidable figure who could remain unshaken even in the most chaotic of legal brawls.

So, William could have gone with that attorney to signal his ironclad will and true independence from his parents’ previous dealings. And instead, he chose Diana’s old firm. Make of that what you will.