I won’t sign a prenup, says smitten Harry

PRINCE HARRY always has been something of a romantic, publicly lamenting his difficulties in finding lasting love.

Now he’s engaged to Meghan Markle, the 33-year-old has made the most dramatic sign of his devotion: I hear that Harry has rejected signing a prenuptial agreement to safeguard-his estimated £30 million fortune.

‘There was never any question in Harry’s mind that he would sign a prenup,’ one of his friends tells me. ‘He’s determined that his marriage will be a lasting one, so there’s no need for him to sign anything.’

The disclosure follows persistent rumours that courtiers wanted Harry to safeguard his chunk of the Windsor millions. Meghan divorced her first husband, american film producer Trevor Engelson, after two years.

Last week, well- connected broadsheet columnist Sophia Money-Coutts reported ‘whispers’ that a prenup was being drawn up. ‘Both Harry and-Meghan have assets to protect,’ the baron’s daughter remarked. ‘Given divorce rates, it’s worth couples having a frank discussion about what each is bringing to the party before signing that marriage register.’

Prenups are not legally enforceable in the UK, but are increasingly taken into account during divorce cases.

Harry was handed £10 million of the inheritance from his mother, Princess Diana, when he turned 30. He is said-to have another £20 million of assets. Meghan, 36, has amassed an estimated£4 million fortune from her successful acting career.

Harry would be following the example of his brother, Prince William, who rejected a prenup before tying the knot with Kate Middleton.

Their mother, who also didn’t have such an agreement, had to fight hard-to win a divorce settlement of £17 million from Prince Charles in 1996, as well as £400,000 per year.

The Duchess of york fared worse, claiming she received only £15,000 a year from her 1996 settlement with Prince andrew. However, officials later insisted she had been given a £3 million lump sum.

a Kensington Palace spokesman declined to comment on the ‘private matter’.