Just to inject a bit of commonsense into this, There is a problem.

First, let's dispose of the initial question (what happened?). That's easy - the Minister overuled the judges. So much for an independent judicial system.

Second, this has absolutely nothing to do with the royal assent. The problem arises from a convention that allows the monarch to request changes to draft legislation at an early stage, usually before it is published for general consultation, if such legislation may have an adverse effect on his/her private interests (my italics). This convention has been extended to the heir, apparently on the basis that it's part of preparation for the monarch's role.

I find either of these steps difficult to justify. Why should any citizen be allowed preferential access to Ministers in the drafting of legislation? Applying the convention to the heir, whose private income comes largely from the Duchy of Cornwall (a major estate affected by many changes to legislation) is asking for trouble. We now have it, because the current heir has strong, and very odd, opinions on many matters (architecture, medicine, etc) and Minsters appear to have taken these odd opinions seriously in drafting legislation.

If his submissions were made public, we would at least know how our laws are made outside Parliament.

Phil