The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #4021  
Old 01-07-2019, 12:26 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 765
If Harry/Meghan's children don't get to be HRHs Prince/Princess, does the Crown still have custody of their children?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4022  
Old 01-07-2019, 12:29 PM
muriel's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fijiro View Post
If Harry/Meghan's children don't get to be HRHs Prince/Princess, does the Crown still have custody of their children?
The Crown does not "have custody of their children", H & M will.

If you are alluding to any potential divorce, the English courts will have jurisdiction on the matter. As they will be quite far down the line of succession, it is unlikely any arrangements for the "Crown" to have custody will need to be put in place.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #4023  
Old 01-07-2019, 12:37 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fijiro
If Harry/Meghan's children don't get to be HRHs Prince/Princess, does the Crown still have custody of their children?


Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
The Crown does not "have custody of their children", H & M will.

If you are alluding to any potential divorce, the English courts will have jurisdiction on the matter. As they will be quite far down the line of succession, it is unlikely any arrangements for the "Crown" to have custody will need to be put in place.
No, I was not alluding to divorce, (I hope it doesn't happen).
I was just wondering in case of out of country travels, since they're not HRHs do parents need permission to take them out of the country for travels.
Reply With Quote
  #4024  
Old 01-07-2019, 01:09 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 1,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fijiro View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fijiro
If Harry/Meghan's children don't get to be HRHs Prince/Princess, does the Crown still have custody of their children?




No, I was not alluding to divorce, (I hope it doesn't happen).
I was just wondering in case of out of country travels, since they're not HRHs do parents need permission to take them out of the country for travels.
It's grey area. Maybe Harry and Meghan are their children's custodiants, but maybe the queen is their custodian. We don't know.
Reply With Quote
  #4025  
Old 01-07-2019, 01:22 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,837
It was once speculated that Andrew and Fergie wanted their daughter to go to Aiglon in Switzerland which obviously never happened but it was reported at the time that they would need HM's permission for her granddaughters to do that.
Reply With Quote
  #4026  
Old 01-07-2019, 07:43 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,219
The Queen, as the monarch, can refuse to allow the children in the line of succession to do certain things such as leave the country. This law goes back to George II and make no reference to being HRHs - just line of succession.

What this would mean is that if Harry and Meghan were to divorce, she wouldn't get custody at all as that would have to remain with Harry (or jointly shared as happened with Charles and Diana; Andrew and Fergie and Anne and Mark). Had those divorces contested custody the Queen would have had final custody and not the parents.

She does have to give consent for them to be taken out of the country and for final decisions, such as education.
Reply With Quote
  #4027  
Old 01-07-2019, 07:56 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The Queen, as the monarch, can refuse to allow the children in the line of succession to do certain things such as leave the country. This law goes back to George II and make no reference to being HRHs - just line of succession.

What this would mean is that if Harry and Meghan were to divorce, she wouldn't get custody at all as that would have to remain with Harry (or jointly shared as happened with Charles and Diana; Andrew and Fergie and Anne and Mark). Had those divorces contested custody the Queen would have had final custody and not the parents.

She does have to give consent for them to be taken out of the country and for final decisions, such as education.
There must be a limit to that because surely the queen cannot order the Norwegian royals around just because they are in line of succession.
Reply With Quote
  #4028  
Old 01-07-2019, 09:33 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,112
Questions about British Styles and Titles

Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
There must be a limit to that because surely the queen cannot order the Norwegian royals around just because they are in line of succession.

I believe the stance the BRF has typically taken is that those who are descended from women who married into foreign royalty no longer fall under the same restrictions as those who are not.

So, the Norwegians, being descended from Maud of Wales, who married into the NRF, no longer have to follow the rules that those descended from Maud’s siblings, as none of them married into foreign royalty.

This is why the Hanovers continued to ask the Queen for permission to marry (prior to the recent changes), as they technically haven’t married into a foreign royal house.
Reply With Quote
  #4029  
Old 01-07-2019, 11:51 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,219
The Hanoverians are descended from a British Princess who married into a foreign royal house as they are descended from the Empress Frederick and therefore did not need to ask for permission. That they chose to do so is probably because they felt like it but they were certainly exempt.

The Norwegians, like the Swedes, Danes and Spanish were also descended from a British princess who married into a foreign royal house and were equally exempt.

The rules, about custody, only apply to the BRF and not the other royal families and only to the descendants of the reigning monarch not to the entire 6000+ in the line of succession,
Reply With Quote
  #4030  
Old 01-08-2019, 06:39 AM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The Hanoverians are descended from a British Princess who married into a foreign royal house as they are descended from the Empress Frederick and therefore did not need to ask for permission. That they chose to do so is probably because they felt like it but they were certainly exempt.

The Norwegians, like the Swedes, Danes and Spanish were also descended from a British princess who married into a foreign royal house and were equally exempt.
I guess that to the Hannoverians their agnatic descent from the Kings of the United Kingdom goes before their descent from Princess Victoria. Especially when one considers their use of the title Prince/ss of the United Kingdom.
To my knowledge neither the Swedes nor the Danes have asked permission since Margareth of Connaught married Gustav Adolf of Sweden-Norway nor have the Norwegians asked permission since Maud of York married Carl of Denmark.
Reply With Quote
  #4031  
Old 01-08-2019, 08:11 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The Queen, as the monarch, can refuse to allow the children in the line of succession to do certain things such as leave the country. This law goes back to George II and make no reference to being HRHs - just line of succession.

What this would mean is that if Harry and Meghan were to divorce, she wouldn't get custody at all as that would have to remain with Harry (or jointly shared as happened with Charles and Diana; Andrew and Fergie and Anne and Mark). Had those divorces contested custody the Queen would have had final custody and not the parents.

She does have to give consent for them to be taken out of the country and for final decisions, such as education.
That is interesting, Is there an specific act of Parliament regulating those matters or is it an unwritten convention ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I believe the stance the BRF has typically taken is that those who are descended from women who married into foreign royalty no longer fall under the same restrictions as those who are not.

So, the Norwegians, being descended from Maud of Wales, who married into the NRF, no longer have to follow the rules that those descended from Maud’s siblings, as none of them married into foreign royalty.

This is why the Hanovers continued to ask the Queen for permission to marry (prior to the recent changes), as they technically haven’t married into a foreign royal house.
Would the restrictions apply though to the Lascelles or Fife (Carnegie) families for example ?
Reply With Quote
  #4032  
Old 01-08-2019, 08:51 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 1,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
That is interesting, Is there an specific act of Parliament regulating those matters or is it an unwritten convention ?
Custody of royal grandchildren
Royal Musings: Custody of royal grandchildren

But we don't know exact situation with royal great-grandchildren. Of course king Charles will be legal custodian of all Harry's children.
Reply With Quote
  #4033  
Old 01-08-2019, 09:02 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
Custody of royal grandchildren
Royal Musings: Custody of royal grandchildren

But we don't know exact situation with royal great-grandchildren. Of course king Charles will be legal custodian of all Harry's children.
Thanks for the clarification ! So we are talking about a court ruling rather than an act of Parliament and, apparently, it applies only to the monarch’s grandchildren and no further than that. In theory, Harry’s children would not be covered by the ruling until Charles ascended the throne.
Reply With Quote
  #4034  
Old 01-08-2019, 09:11 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 1,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Thanks for the clarification ! So we are talking about a court ruling rather than an act of Parliament and, apparently, it applies only to the monarch’s grandchildren and no further than that. In theory, Harry’s children would not be covered by the ruling until Charles ascended the throne.
We need to know exact wording of this court ruling, to know modern legal interpretation of this ruling and precedents. It's too early to make any conclusions.
Reply With Quote
  #4035  
Old 01-08-2019, 09:41 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
Custody of royal grandchildren
Royal Musings: Custody of royal grandchildren

But we don't know exact situation with royal great-grandchildren. Of course king Charles will be legal custodian of all Harry's children.
... and William's children, too, I suppose.
Reply With Quote
  #4036  
Old 01-08-2019, 11:04 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spheno View Post
We need to know exact wording of this court ruling, to know modern legal interpretation of this ruling and precedents. It's too early to make any conclusions.
There is no legal modern interpretation to be known. The rules has been used many time legally. Like it was discussed in another thread. There was no legal custody settlements for the children during the divorce, of Anne, Charles, and Andrew, only private agreements between the parties. Diana's will stated that she wanted her brother Charles Earl spencer and one of her sisters to be legal Guardians of her children, this stipulation was overruled and the Queen appointed Sir john Major as a legal guardian of William and Harry. It is he and his team who dealt with all financial matters regarding Diana's succession
Reply With Quote
  #4037  
Old 01-08-2019, 11:24 AM
SLV's Avatar
SLV SLV is offline
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,679
Is there a reason that the Prime minister was choosen? Would that mean that if W&C would divorce now, that PM May would be a guardian?
Reply With Quote
  #4038  
Old 01-08-2019, 11:40 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLV View Post
Is there a reason that the Prime minister was choosen? Would that mean that if W&C would divorce now, that PM May would be a guardian?
The rule as I understand it concerns the grand children of the sovereign. As of now, DoC's children are not concerned since they are great grandchildren of the sovereign. It is Charles once King who will have custody of his grandchildren. As for why Sir John Major was chosen, I don't know, only Charles and the Queen know
Reply With Quote
  #4039  
Old 01-08-2019, 12:56 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 765
All these explanations are very interesting; and also very confusing for me.

So, this is how I understand it, the Sovereign has custody of his/her descendants, in this case, HMQueen has custody of Charles, Anne, Andrew, Edward, and all their descendants, i.e. all the Mountbatten-Windsors .
When Charles becomes King, he will have custody of William, Harry, and all their descendants; and eventually when William becomes King, he will have custody of George, Charlotte, Louis, and all their descendants

IMO John Major was probably chosen because it was such a contentious divorce/separation that a selection of a third party was the way to go. Just an opinion!
Reply With Quote
  #4040  
Old 01-08-2019, 01:13 PM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLV View Post
Is there a reason that the Prime minister was choosen? Would that mean that if W&C would divorce now, that PM May would be a guardian?
Sir John Major wasn't PM when Diana died but he had been for the previous 6 years so I presume the weekly meetings with the Queen had given her an insight into his suitability for the role (she might have thought differently had she known about his scandalous affair that only came to light in 2002).
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, consort, duke of york, kate, princess beatrice, queenmother, spouse, styles and titles, titles uk styles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Non-British Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 792 08-22-2021 12:16 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn King Willem-Alexander, Queen Máxima and family 78 08-21-2021 07:14 AM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 894 11-26-2019 11:04 PM
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1897 11-29-2017 03:13 AM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 50 06-02-2017 02:28 PM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian birth britannia british british royal family camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels customs dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family tree gemstones genetics george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers meghan markle monarchists monarchy mongolia names pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria st edward sussex suthida thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:07 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×