However, he will remain a prince, having been born the son of Queen Elizabeth II.

His former wife, Sarah Ferguson, will also no longer use her title of The Duchess of York, it is understood.

In a statement, Prince Andrew said: "In discussion with The King, and my immediate and wider family, we have concluded the continued accusations about me distract from the work of His Majesty and the Royal Family.

"I have decided, as I always have, to put my duty to my family and country first. I stand by my decision five years ago to stand back from public life.

Follow updates: Prince Andrew latest: 'I must go a step further'

"With His Majesty's agreement, we feel I must now go a step further. I will therefore no longer use my title or the honours which have been conferred upon me.

"As I have said previously, I vigorously deny the accusations against me."

King 'glad' of the outcome

The decision comes following increased pressure on Prince Andrew after more reports emerged of his relationship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, and his relationship with an alleged Chinese spy.

It is understood that the change will take effect immediately.

The King is glad of the outcome, it is understood, and the decision was taken in close consultation with His Majesty and other members of the Royal Family.

Read more from Sky News:
Andrew's fall from grace is a never-ending saga
Virginia Giuffre describes alleged encounters with Andrew

Sky News understands he will continue to be known as Prince Andrew and will continue to live at the Windsor Estate at the Royal Lodge.

The move also does not impact the position of his daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, it is understood.

For the second year running, he will not be attending the Royal Family's annual Christmas celebrations at Sandringham, Sky News understands.

'An unwelcome distraction'

Sky News' royal correspondent, Rhiannon Mills, said: "This is quite an extraordinary move. I think it shows that, actually, things had gone too far.

"Prince Andrew, and allegations about him and Virginia Giuffre, were continuing to be too much of a distraction for the Royal Family.

"There are a few more details that I can tell you. This decision was taken in conjunction with the King. Yes, it was the Prince's decision, but with very close consultation with the King involved.

"We understand that the King is glad of this outcome. This change comes into effect immediately. So from this moment he no longer holds those titles.

"The decision was taken in recognition of the fact that the Prince's personal issues have continued to be what has been described as an unwelcome distraction from the wider work of the Royal Family."

What is Prince Andrew accused of?

Prince Andrew has denied allegations made by Ms Giuffre - one of Epstein's victims - of sexual assault.

She had filed a civil lawsuit against Prince Andrew, accusing him of sexually assaulting her on three occasions after she was introduced to him by Epstein.

In a 2019 interview with BBC Newsnight, he said he had no knowledge of ever meeting Ms Giuffre, claiming a well-known image of them together had been doctored.

The case was settled outside of court for a sum believed to have been around £12m.

Ms Giuffre died in April. Her family said Ms Giuffre "lost her life to suicide" at her farm in Western Australia, aged 41.

Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.

The statement comes straight from Prince Andrew, the tone of it very personal as he says he is putting his "duty to my family and country first".

But this was clearly not entirely his decision.

From the first sentence, where he says "in discussion with the King", we're left in no doubt that his brother must have said enough was enough.

Royals latest: Andrew explains decision to give up titles

The fact we're being guided that the King is glad of this outcome says it all; for the monarch and the wider family, the questions of what they were going to do about Andrew had to stop.

After years of upset caused by his association with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, he has done the family one favour by personally announcing that he will no longer use his titles.

For the King to forcibly remove them would have taken up precious parliamentary time and weeks of column inches.

To be clear his titles aren't removed, they remain extant but inactive like his HRH title.

But Prince Andrew won't use them any more and that will be humiliation enough for a man who has already been stripped of his military affiliations, his charity patronages and his ability to have any kind of public profile.

Read more:
Virginia Giuffre details accusation in posthumous book
Sarah Ferguson explains message to Epstein

This ends the questions on what more the monarch could do to show how the family felt about the accusations, the upset and the embarrassment caused.

Will it stop the stories, the allegations and the interest in Prince Andrew? That is far less certain.

But in what is the prince's first public statement since that ill-fated Newsnight interview in 2019, it is striking that he signs it off by saying: "I vigorously deny the accusations against me."

Supporters of the Israeli side have been told they are not allowed to attend November's game in Birmingham after a decision by Birmingham's Safety Advisory Group (SAG).

The group - made up of local stakeholders, including representatives from the council, police and event organisers - said the decision was due to a high risk of violence based on "current intelligence and previous incidents".

Politics live: MPs react to Maccabi Tel Aviv fan ban

The decision has been criticised across the political spectrum, with Sir Keir Starmer describing it as a "wrong decision" while Tory opposition leader Kemi Badenoch called it a "national disgrace".

In a statement on Friday night, a government spokesperson said: "No one should be stopped from watching a football game simply because of who they are.

"The government is working with policing and other partners to do everything in our power to ensure this game can safely go ahead, with all fans present.

"We are exploring what additional resources and support are required so all fans can attend."

Meanwhile, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said: "Antisemitism is a stain on our society that shames us all. Every football fan, whoever they are, should be able to watch their team in safety.

"This government is doing everything in our power to ensure all fans can safely attend the game."

The prime minister's spokesman previously said Sir Keir would "do everything in his power to give Jewish communities the security they deserve".

Read more:
Why are fans banned - and has this happened before?
How this raises questions about one of the UK's biggest cities

The Home Office offered to provide more police for the event, while Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy and Communities Secretary Steve Reed also intervened.

However, senior police insisted the ban was necessary and cited clashes and hate crime offences committed when the Israeli team travelled to Amsterdam to play Ajax last year.

The Aston Villa vs Maccabi Tel Aviv match - set to take place on Thursday 6 November - is a Europa League fixture.

UEFA, which runs the tournament, had urged UK authorities to ensure away fans could attend.

It comes after several local media outlets in Spain reported that Mr Andic's death was being investigated as a possible homicide.

The billionaire founder of the fashion chain reportedly slipped and fell from a 150-metre cliff while hiking in the Monserrat caves, near Barcelona, last December.

La Vanguardia newspaper reported late on Thursday that one element the judge looking into Mr Andic's death was investigating was contradictory statements Mr Andic's son Jonathan gave as a witness, and that authorities were searching his phone for more evidence.

However, the newspaper reported that, during the 10-month probe, investigators had not found any conclusive evidence linking Jonathan to his father's death.

Barcelona court's press office said on Friday that the case, which is still sealed, wasn't directed at any particular individual.

The Andic family said it expected Jonathan to be proven innocent.

Read more from Sky News:
King first British monarch for 500 years to pray publicly with Pope
Hamas explains delay in returning hostages' bodies

According to La Vanguardia, a statement from them read: "The Andic family has not and will not comment on Isak Andic's death in all these months.

"However, they wish to show their respect for the ongoing investigations and will continue to cooperate with the relevant authorities, as they have done so far.

"They are also confident that this process will be concluded as soon as possible and that Jonathan Andic's innocence will be proved."

Seen as a rival of Zara founder Amancio Ortega, Istanbul-born Isak Andic moved to Catalonia in northeastern Spain in the 1960s and founded Mango in 1984.

Son appointed board vice-president

At the time of his death, he was non-executive chairman of the fashion brand and worth $4.5bn (£3.6bn), according to Forbes.

Jonathan Andic was appointed vice-president of the board of the privately held company on his father's death and president of its holding company MNG.

His sisters Judith and Sarah were named as vice presidents of MNG.

Sky News has contacted Mango for a comment.

Brogan Stewart was sentenced to 11 years in prison, Christopher Ringrose for 10 years and Marco Pitzettu for eight years by a judge at Sheffield Crown Court on Friday.

Stewart, 25, Ringrose, 34, and Pitzettu, 25, stockpiled body armour and more than 200 weapons including crossbows, swords, machetes, axes, hunting knives and had 3D-printed parts of a gun.

An almost completed FGC-9 Mk II printed assault rifle found in Ringrose's loft was missing the barrel and firing pin, but the men were sourcing the components to complete the weapon, which prosecutors said could then "have been used to devastating consequences".

The court heard the trio had a shared interest in bushcraft and YouTube videos of "preppers" - who prepare for the possibility of a world-changing disaster by stockpiling supplies, food and ammunition.

But prosecutors said they were preparing for a race war and had used the online communities to recruit an inner circle, which moved on to neo-Nazi chat groups before setting up their own private group, as they prepared to take action.

It was infiltrated by an undercover officer on 5 January last year.

Stewart messaged the officer on the encrypted Telegram app, telling him he was disillusioned with other far-right groups that just "sit around and talk," adding: "I want to get my own group together because action speaks louder than words."

Self-appointed leader Stewart, of Tingley, Wakefield, West Yorkshire, appointed Ringrose, of Cannock, Staffordshire, and Pitzettu, of Mickleover, Derbyshire, as "armourers" and they discussed getting a uniform as well as potential targets, including mosques and synagogues.

In a group call on 5 February last year, they said the plan was to "cruise around" looking for "human targets" near an Islamic education centre, "do whatever we do, then back at mine for tea and medals and a debrief".

Before the "operation" went ahead, Stewart wanted the members, who had never met in person, to "hang out, bring ourselves closer together and just cement that brotherhood" on 18 February.

But the event did not go ahead, and the group were arrested on 20 February after counter-terrorism police raided properties in Yorkshire, Derbyshire and Staffordshire.

All three men were found guilty of preparing acts of terrorism and possessing information useful for terrorism in May.

At trial, a jury ignored defence arguments that the defendants were fantasists with no intention of carrying out their threats.

Ringrose was also convicted of manufacturing the lower receiver for a 3D firearm, a prohibited weapon, while Pitzettu pleaded guilty to possessing a stun gun.

Jurors heard how the defendants formed an online group called Einsatz 14 in January 2024, with "like-minded extremists" who wanted to "go to war for their chosen cause".

Stewart told the group: "Hitler did more for his people than any politician. And for Britain to have a p*** and zionist in charge of the country is absolutely outrageous."

Prosecutors said this last comment was a reference to then prime minister Rishi Sunak.

Sentencing them, judge Mrs Justice Cutts said she believed they all continued to adhere to their extreme right-wing ideology.

All would be dangerous after their release from prison, she said, noting the group's ideology was "laid bare" in a 374-page dossier of internet activity presented to jurors.

The document was "filled with hate towards black and other non-white races, especially Muslim people and immigrants, with ideas of white supremacy and racial purity together with a belief that there must soon be a race war".

It featured the "glorification and admiration of the policies and actions of Hitler and the German Nazi Party, including antisemitism, and of mass killers who had targeted black or Muslim communities".

The judge said she did not believe a terrorist attack was "imminent", but "was likely in the not too distant future".

Read more on Sky News:
Talks over ban on Israeli fans
Palestine Action can challenge terror ban

Detective Chief Superintendent James Dunkerley, head of Counter Terrorism Policing North East, said the group came together because of their "extreme racist views".

"They've idolised the Nazi party, they've glorified mass murders, and they share a hatred of groups such as the Jewish community and the Muslim community," he said.

"I genuinely believe had we not taken action, this group could've carried out a violent attack and the consequences of that attack could've been fatal."