Nicholas Medforth-Mills (formerly His Royal Highness Prince Nicholas of Romania)

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Until 2007 also for former King Michael himself neither his daughters nor his grandchildren were successors at all. It is purely because of an unilateral and personal change by himself (with afterwards a lot of modifications) that the named persons became "successors" at all.

They have as much a "claim" on a non-existing throne as you and me, or the Hohenzollerns in Germany, or King Michael's nephew Paul-Philippe von Hohenzollern, the son of his elder brother.

But who are you to say that they have as much as a claim as you and me or anybody else, there is no claim because they are rightful heirs and it's beyond me how even you, somebody behind the internet claims to dispute anything to succession, there is no other line of succession at all

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Until 2007 also for former King Michael himself neither his daughters nor his grandchildren were successors at all. It is purely because of an unilateral and personal change by himself (with afterwards a lot of modifications) that the named persons became "successors" at all.

They have as much a "claim" on a non-existing throne as you and me, or the Hohenzollerns in Germany, or King Michael's nephew Paul-Philippe von Hohenzollern, the son of his elder brother.

The popularity of Nicholas de Roumanie Medforth Mills has nothing to do with dynastic rights but only to the fact he is the late King's grandson.

[Lee-Z]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

You seem to ignore the fact that they were exiled, would you have expected the princesses to give birth on the borders of Romania?

I'm getting a very special "mental image" here...

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

But who are you to say that they have as much as a claim as you and me or anybody else, there is no claim because they are rightful heirs and it's beyond me how even you, somebody behind the internet claims to dispute anything to succession, there is no other line of succession at all

Rightful heirs? On base of what? The only legal document, or document which had legality, about the succession to the throne of Romania is the Constitution of the Kingdom of Romania. That state was seized by the Communists and the royal family was exiled.

Until 2007 the succession was based on that Constitution. The same Constitution which grounded King Michael's kingship, the same Constitution he once solemnly pledged to defend and to maintain.

That is the only document which ever had legal validity. The "Fundamental Rules" set by King Michael (and not so very fundamental since his enthusiast scrapping) is a private document. It has zero comma zero legality.

When someone starts a lawsuit on base of these Fundamental Rules, then the Judge will say: "Excuse me: Romania is a republic. There is no King. There is no throne. Your document is a particulier correspondence. There is no any jurisdiction for this Court or the State on base of that document".

With other words: the succession has ended with the death of the former King. Anyone is as free to claim the throne. The closest are the Hohenzollerns, based on the only document which ever had legality but they -wisely- remain far away in Baden-Württemberg. For the rest any claim is as thin as one night's ice because based on private conviction and pretense.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Rightful heirs? On base of what? The only legal document, or document which had legality, about the succession to the throne of Romania is the Constitution of the Kingdom of Romania. That state was seized by the Communists and the royal family was exiled.

Until 2007 the succession was based on that Constitution. The same Constitution which grounded King Michael's kingship, the same Constitution he once solemnly pledged to defend and to maintain.

That is the only document which ever had legal validity. The "Fundamental Rules" set by King Michael (and not so very fundamental since his enthusiast scrapping) is a private document. It has zero comma zero legality.

When someone starts a lawsuit on base of these Fundamental Rules, then the Judge will say: "Excuse me: Romania is a republic. There is no King. There is no throne. Your document is a particulier correspondence. There is no any jurisdiction for this Court or the State on base of that document".

With other words: the succession has ended with the death of the former King. Anyone is as free to claim the throne. The closest are the Hohenzollerns, based on the only document which ever had legality but they -wisely- remain far away in Baden-Württemberg. For the rest any claim is as thin as one night's ice because based on private conviction and pretense.

This is a very clear explanation of the situation but obviously some Romanian royalists support Nicholas de Roumanie Medforth Mills. This is a fact.

[LadyFinn]

Romanian media writes that Nicholas spoke on Saturday, in the presence of the priests, about his return permanently to Romania. The sources say that he is going to have a house at Curtea de Arges. He had said that he is impressed by Curtea de Arges and its people. He spoke nicely about the beautiful city, the people there, but said especially that he would be close to his grandfather. But Nicholas must solve things with his work in England and, most likely, in the beginning of spring return permanently to Romania, to his new home in Curtea de Arges.
EXCLUSIV ! Principele Nicolae se mută la Curtea de Argeş*!_! _ Muntenia News

[Cory]

Originally Posted by LadyFinn

Romanian media writes that Nicholas spoke on Saturday, in the presence of the priests, about his return permanently to Romania. The sources say that he is going to have a house at Curtea de Arges. He had said that he is impressed by Curtea de Arges and its people. He spoke nicely about the beautiful city, the people there, but said especially that he would be close to his grandfather. But Nicholas must solve things with his work in England and, most likely, in the beginning of spring return permanently to Romania, to his new home in Curtea de Arges.
EXCLUSIV ! Principele Nicolae se mută la Curtea de Argeş*!_! _ Muntenia News

His presence in Bucharest will certainly be a hope for many people and will boost the monarchist movement.

[maria-olivia]

taratata ,...
Could you provide pictures and the date of his wedding .Was it religious or Civil ? Are they official documents?

[Cory]

He had only a civil marriage as everybody knows by now.

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Rightful heirs? On base of what? The only legal document, or document which had legality, about the succession to the throne of Romania is the Constitution of the Kingdom of Romania. That state was seized by the Communists and the royal family was exiled.

Until 2007 the succession was based on that Constitution. The same Constitution which grounded King Michael's kingship, the same Constitution he once solemnly pledged to defend and to maintain.

That is the only document which ever had legal validity. The "Fundamental Rules" set by King Michael (and not so very fundamental since his enthusiast scrapping) is a private document. It has zero comma zero legality.

When someone starts a lawsuit on base of these Fundamental Rules, then the Judge will say: "Excuse me: Romania is a republic. There is no King. There is no throne. Your document is a particulier correspondence. There is no any jurisdiction for this Court or the State on base of that document".

With other words: the succession has ended with the death of the former King. Anyone is as free to claim the throne. The closest are the Hohenzollerns, based on the only document which ever had legality but they -wisely- remain far away in Baden-Württemberg. For the rest any claim is as thin as one night's ice because based on private conviction and pretense.

And on and on and on it goes.

[Cory]

When he is in Romania Nicholas de Roumanie Medforth Mills lives in Bucharest. He has never said he wanted to live in Curtea de Arges.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by LadyRohan

And on and on and on it goes.

Let us then agree there are no "rightful heirs".
If you disagree and say there is a rightful heir: who is he or she and by right of what exactly?

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Let us then agree there are no "rightful heirs".
If you disagree and say there is a rightful heir: who is he or she and by right of what exactly?

I think we all know who the only heirs are, and their right is the natural succession which king Michael paved.. there is no dispute, I think you should also accept it and move on :)

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

I think we all know who the only heirs are, and their right is the natural succession which king Michael paved.. there is no dispute, I think you should also accept it and move on :)

With utmost respect, but this is worthless arguing. I fall over the word rightful ( = having a right to a property, a position, or a status on base of legislation). What is the base for the claimed right?

The Constitution of the Kingdom Romania (Karl Friedrich von Hohenzollern):
this is pretense on base of a Constitution which is no longer enforced.

The "Fundamental Rules" with a proposed succession (Margareta):
this is pretense on base of a private document without jurisdiction

The fact of someone being the most senior male agnate of the former royal family (Paul-Philipp):
this is pretense on base of a suggested birthright.

No one of them, not Karl Friedrich, not Margareta and not Paul-Philipp are a rightful heir to the kingship. No any of them can enforce it based on law. Or are you suggesting the opposite?

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

With utmost respect, but this is worthless arguing. I fall over the word rightful ( = having a right to a property, a position, or a status on base of legislation). What is the base for the claimed right?

The Constitution of the Kingdom Romania (Karl Friedrich von Hohenzollern):
this is pretense on base of a Constitution which is no longer enforced.

The "Fundamental Rules" with a proposed succession (Margareta):
this is pretense on base of a private document without jurisdiction

The fact of someone being the most senior male agnate of the former royal family (Paul-Philipp):
this is pretense on base of a suggested birthright.

No one of them, not Karl Friedrich, not Margareta and not Paul-Philipp are a rightful heir to the kingship. No any of them can enforce it based on law. Or are you suggesting the opposite?

It's beyond me why you're making up these alternatives because it's set that the Head of the House of Romania and heir to the former Romanian Throne is Crown Princess Margareta, who's rights to the throne are not disputed by anyone and that of Paul-Phillips' are invalid and illegitimate because he's irrelevant and is not even regarded as a Royal by anyone so once again.. tell me, what is the point of making up your alternatives when we all know what the case is and nobody, not even Romanians dispute it

[LadyRohan]

Originally Posted by LadyFinn

Romanian media writes that Nicholas spoke on Saturday, in the presence of the priests, about his return permanently to Romania. The sources say that he is going to have a house at Curtea de Arges. He had said that he is impressed by Curtea de Arges and its people. He spoke nicely about the beautiful city, the people there, but said especially that he would be close to his grandfather. But Nicholas must solve things with his work in England and, most likely, in the beginning of spring return permanently to Romania, to his new home in Curtea de Arges.
EXCLUSIV ! Principele Nicolae se mută la Curtea de Argeş*!_! _ Muntenia News

What is clear from his recent comments, is that Nicholas is returning to Romania to set up residence, in what will be an interesting move for the Royal Family and the cause of monarchy in Romania. Not sure his comments should be interpreted as a literal desire to move to Curtea de Arges, or more a wish to spend his time in Romania and among the people his grandfather served. What matters is that he returns, and when he does, I'm quite sure the reconciliation will continue within the RF, and he will strengthen the agenda of the Royal House.

[Ish]

Originally Posted by RoyalJewelish

It's beyond me why you're making up these alternatives because it's set that the Head of the House of Romania and heir to the former Romanian Throne is Crown Princess Margareta, who's rights to the throne are not disputed by anyone and that of Paul-Phillips' are invalid and illegitimate because he's irrelevant and is not even regarded as a Royal by anyone so once again.. tell me, what is the point of making up your alternatives when we all know what the case is and nobody, not even Romanians dispute it

RoyalJewish, I ask this respectfully, but are you newer to following the Romanian royals? Because there is grounds for supporting every single one of the claimaints that Duc has listed, including Paul-Philippe.

- Paul-Philippe and his father Carol have fought and won a number of legal cases recognizing Carol as a legitimate son of Carol II and granting Carol (and thus Paul) full succession rights. Thus, in the era where the Romanian Royal Family is not reigning, there as much of a chance of a restoration under Paul as their is under Margarita - especially as Paul has an established heir (his son, Carol), while Margarita really doesn’t.

- According to the last Constitution of Romania in which the Succession was addressed, none of the children or grandchildren of Michael I have succession rights, and actually Karl Friedrich, Prince of Hohenzollern is the heir. This claim (even if the Hohenzollerns do not exercise it) is at this time the closest to being Romanian Law, as it’s supported by actual Romanian Law, however defunct that Law is.

- According to Michael’s rules, the successor is his daughter, Margarita, and according to the precedent he set the succession can be changed willy-nilly with absolutely no explanation provided to the public (as seen with Nicholas, Irina, and Irina’s children and grandchildren). Further, this line has no stability for the future, as Margarita has no children, and the asides from Nicholas, no member of the next generation has shown any interest in Romania whatsoever - so why on Earth would the Romanians want a restoration under this line, if this line is clear that it doesn’t care about Romania? (Granted, the same could be said about the Hohenzollerns)

- Romanian monarchists - who were forced to accept Margarita during Michael’s life, but are not forced to do so now - may also want to turn to Nicholas himself, as it was Nicholas that they wanted Michael to name as his heir in the first place. Regardless of the circumstances of his removal from Michael’s succession, Nicholas still remains a popular person in Romania and still expresses an interest for Romania

That puts 4 different possible claimaints to the throne now that Michael has passed.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Ish

RoyalJewish, I ask this respectfully, but are you newer to following the Romanian royals? Because there is grounds for supporting every single one of the claimaints that Duc has listed, including Paul-Philippe.

- Paul-Philippe and his father Carol have fought and won a number of legal cases recognizing Carol as a legitimate son of Carol II and granting Carol (and thus Paul) full succession rights. Thus, in the era where the Romanian Royal Family is not reigning, there as much of a chance of a restoration under Paul as their is under Margarita - especially as Paul has an established heir (his son, Carol), while Margarita really doesn’t.

- According to the last Constitution of Romania in which the Succession was addressed, none of the children or grandchildren of Michael I have succession rights, and actually Karl Friedrich, Prince of Hohenzollern is the heir. This claim (even if the Hohenzollerns do not exercise it) is at this time the closest to being Romanian Law, as it’s supported by actual Romanian Law, however defunct that Law is.

- According to Michael’s rules, the successor is his daughter, Margarita, and according to the precedent he set the succession can be changed willy-nilly with absolutely no explanation provided to the public (as seen with Nicholas, Irina, and Irina’s children and grandchildren). Further, this line has no stability for the future, as Margarita has no children, and the asides from Nicholas, no member of the next generation has shown any interest in Romania whatsoever - so why on Earth would the Romanians want a restoration under this line, if this line is clear that it doesn’t care about Romania? (Granted, the same could be said about the Hohenzollerns)

- Romanian monarchists - who were forced to accept Margarita during Michael’s life, but are not forced to do so now - may also want to turn to Nicholas himself, as it was Nicholas that they wanted Michael to name as his heir in the first place. Regardless of the circumstances of his removal from Michael’s succession, Nicholas still remains a popular person in Romania and still expresses an interest for Romania

That puts 4 different possible claimaints to the throne now that Michael has passed.

Nicholas de Roumanie Medforth Mills is certainly the one that has popularity and lives more and more in the country. He is more people's choice even if he has no rights de iure according to the last royal Constitution.

[RoyalJewelish]

Originally Posted by Ish

RoyalJewish, I ask this respectfully, but are you newer to following the Romanian royals? Because there is grounds for supporting every single one of the claimaints that Duc has listed, including Paul-Philippe.

- Paul-Philippe and his father Carol have fought and won a number of legal cases recognizing Carol as a legitimate son of Carol II and granting Carol (and thus Paul) full succession rights. Thus, in the era where the Romanian Royal Family is not reigning, there as much of a chance of a restoration under Paul as their is under Margarita - especially as Paul has an established heir (his son, Carol), while Margarita really doesn’t.

- According to the last Constitution of Romania in which the Succession was addressed, none of the children or grandchildren of Michael I have succession rights, and actually Karl Friedrich, Prince of Hohenzollern is the heir. This claim (even if the Hohenzollerns do not exercise it) is at this time the closest to being Romanian Law, as it’s supported by actual Romanian Law, however defunct that Law is.

- According to Michael’s rules, the successor is his daughter, Margarita, and according to the precedent he set the succession can be changed willy-nilly with absolutely no explanation provided to the public (as seen with Nicholas, Irina, and Irina’s children and grandchildren). Further, this line has no stability for the future, as Margarita has no children, and the asides from Nicholas, no member of the next generation has shown any interest in Romania whatsoever - so why on Earth would the Romanians want a restoration under this line, if this line is clear that it doesn’t care about Romania? (Granted, the same could be said about the Hohenzollerns)

- Romanian monarchists - who were forced to accept Margarita during Michael’s life, but are not forced to do so now - may also want to turn to Nicholas himself, as it was Nicholas that they wanted Michael to name as his heir in the first place. Regardless of the circumstances of his removal from Michael’s succession, Nicholas still remains a popular person in Romania and still expresses an interest for Romania

That puts 4 different possible claimaints to the throne now that Michael has passed.

I'm Romanian myself, and whilst I wasn't born in Romania I've visited a number of times and I have family and friends in Romania as well as keeping up with the Romanian news.

Many of the board posters here seem to believe that it's a matter of facts and statements but it no longer is, these are only made up alternatives which have no representation in today's Romanian society, Romanians barely know and neither accept a claimant to the Romanian Throne (Paul-Philippe and Hohenzollern-Sigmarimgen's, the latter of which not a single member of the house is interested in the Romanian Throne)... thought Paul has claimed the throne, it isn't recognised internally and externally and the fact that he was recently embroiled in a fraudulent case of claiming property that wasn't his anyway which he knew of and cost the state millions has forced him to keep low.

As for the inheritance, this had nothing at all to do with the line of succession to the former Romanian Throne as that is already out of question, it was regarding the inheritance of the heirs of Prince Carol (former Carol II) as Paul's family had never had rights to Romanian titles nor the throne. The issue isn't about having children, Paul may have as many children as he desires because the headship of the Romanian Royal Family still doesn't pass onto him as his claim is irrelevant and not legitimate.

Of course Nicholas remains ever so popular and will remain to do so, the Romanians remain optimistic in regards of Nicholas' reconciliation with the Royal Family which is already being mediated as you most probably haven't seen.

There is no claim to the former Romanian Throne as there is an heir already and she is not claimant but heir, a claimant claims what's not already theirs and since King Michael's passing, Crown Princess Margareta has assumed headship of the House of Romania and is first in line to the Former Romanian Throne, naturally.

[Cory]

At the moment the only solution really popular seems to be Nicholas de Roumanie Medforth Mills and those that treat him wrongly have to admit this. The final decision regarding who will be King will be taken by the Parliament when Monarchy is restored.
At the moment we can't technically speak about the Royal House but only about the King's Family.