HRH Duke Carlos Javier (1970- ) and the Royal House of Bourbon-Parma: August 2010-

[Ilse]

Carlos Enrique Borbon-Parma Te Deum At Barcelona Cathedral:
Beelden en foto's | Getty Images

[iceflower]

Here are some additional pics of the mass today, October 8:



** ppe gallery **

[iceflower]

.

Finally some pics without watermarks of the recent mass in Barcelona:


** pm: Le petit prince Carlos Enrique Leonard arbore le béret rouge **

[Kandilka]

I am so fond of this nice family!

Wheren't Luisa and Cecilia around?

This white beret looked great on Annemarie.

[iceflower]

.

Prince Carlos spoke at the opening of the Airports Going Green Conference at Amsterdam Airport Shiphol on October 31. During the three-day meeting representatives of international airports discussed the possible cooperation in the field of sustainability.


** Pic ** anp gallery **

[Fürstin Taxis]

Court denies Duke of Parma’s appeal against illegitimate son’s name change – Royal Central


The Duke of Parma has claimed it was ‘an independent decision’ on the part of Brigitte Klynstra to become a mother.

It must seriously hurt to be rejected by your own parent. It says really a lot about CJ as a person. You might be annoyed about a child out of wedlock, but if this child reaches out for you, how bloody cold do you have to be to turn away? If she had an abortion back then, I guess he would have been more content

[Kandilka]

The Duke seems to have his two faces, caring about his official family but hard against everything and everyone that doesn't fit in his traditional schemes...

On the other hand, what do names and titles mean in the modern Netherland and non existing Duchy? Or has it a meaning to the real family life?

Has the first son ever met Annemarie and the younger children? Interesting to know if they like each other.

[Duc_et_Pair]

The son of the Duke was included in holidays with the royal family, so he was certainly no persona non grata. It is more that the Duke is also head of a royal dynasty and -like in every other royal dynasty- children born outside marriage are no dynasts.

For Dutch law however, Carlos Klynstra can request to become known with his father's name and titles. So that is the clash: he is no dynast, but in name, titulature and form of address he is exactly like a dynast, which is - in the eyes of the head of the Royal House of Bourbon-Parma - an undesirable situation.

[GracieGiraffe]

Perhaps the Duke should have waited for the vows of matrimony before satisfying his sexual needs if he feels so strongly on his dynasty. He's starting to sound like a ridiculous man, parading one son through the streets of Spain and rejecting another.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe

Perhaps the Duke should have waited for the vows of matrimony before satisfying his sexual needs if he feels so strongly on his dynasty. He's starting to sound like a ridiculous man, parading one son through the streets of Spain and rejecting another.

Already at the time of the pregnancy it was communicated that this was a result of "an independent decision of the mother" which was not extrapolated because of reasons of privacy.

As a result of this both the mother and the Prince agreed that there would be no paternity claim of the father, that there would be no legal relationship between the Prince, Mrs Klynstra and the child. When the child was born, the mother was the only registered parent in the municipal registry.

The child was not hidden away from his donor. On the contrary: he was part of events in the Royal House and the House of Bourbon-Parma. The child grew up on the estate of his grandparents, the Count and Countess van Rechteren-Limpurg.

The legal team of the Prince has two objections:
- in 1998 the revised Nobility Act was introduced. Natural children from a titled father belonging to the nobility could request to be known with their father's title. There was no retroactivity. Carlos Klynstra was born before the new Act came in force without retroactive working;
- the House of Bourbon-Parma is -beside the Royal House- the only royal family in the Netherlands, with a codex, statutes and rules. There is no any Royal House which considers children born outside a marriage as dynasts. Enforcing the modernized Nobility Act with retroactive workings would mean that a non-dynast starts a whole new lineage of the House of Bourbon-Parma without dynastic rights but with indentical style and title, which was "undesireable".

The Court of Justice understood the objectives of the Duke but was of the opinion that since the four children of Princess Irene were incorporated into the Nobility of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, they -and their children- are Dutch nobles and the Dutch justice system only speaks for the Dutch titulature. The Court has no jurisdiction over foreign titles and therefore had no opinion about that.

The Court agreed with the Prince that there was no retroactive working in the Nobility Act for the nobility of extramarital children born before 1998 (like Carlos Klynstra).

The Court of Justice also agreed with the Prince that the legislation on name and birthright still is in development and that the way how a pregnancy was caused is still in ongoing jurisprudence: has a child from a donor the absolute right on his donor's surname? Has a perfectly legal agreement between both natural parents -that there would be no legal paternity and choice of set surname- not to be respected?

The Court agreed that this was a balancing of clashing legal rights. In the classification of clashing rights the Court found that the right of the natural child on the surname of the father was leading. In the Netherlands name right, titulature of nobility is an integral part of the surname. So two rights are clashing: the son of Carlos prins de Bourbon de Parme can not claim nobility with retroactive workings. But he can claim to have his father's surname. The title and style are part of the surname, so he can become Carlos jr. prins de Bourbon de Parme.... In this the Court classified the name right over the nobility right. Justification: the name right is coded in the European Convention of Human Rights. Nobility is not. The ECHR is an international treaty overturning national legislation.

The Duke can go in appeal against the decision of the Court of Justice. For so far Carlos Klynstra had not effectuated his request: there is no Royal Decree concerning his name change.

[Kandilka]

Hmmm, "ridiculous" sounds not like the totally correct word... let´s call him "anti-cyclic"

There is no chance in an any-shaped future to re-create Parma into a duchy again.

What the hell is so important in dynastic matters? The only thing that lasts over all the centuries is the family tie itself.

But the duke is old enough to decide himself.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Kandilka

Hmmm, "ridiculous" sounds not like the totally correct word... let´s call him "anti-cyclic"

There is no chance in an any-shaped future to re-create Parma into a duchy again.

What the hell is so important in dynastic matters? The only thing that lasts over all the centuries is the family tie itself.

But the duke is old enough to decide himself.

If all this had no importance, why is Carlos Klynstra, raised in privileged circumstances on the estate of his grandparents the Count and Countess van Rechteren-Limpurg then requesting to be known as HRH Prince Carlos jr. de Bourbon de Parme? It has nothing to do with the Duke, it is the wish of Mr Klynstra.

That the Duchy of Parma will be restored or not, is not relevant. Carlos Klynstra is a direct male line descendant of a royal dynasty which delivered Sovereigns of France, of Spain, of Two Sicilies, of Luxembourg, of Parma, etc. and most likely Carlos Klynstra wants this heritage to be recognized.

[Marengo]

As a reminder: it was revealed in february that prince Carlos did want to be involved with his son from the start. It was the mother who forbade it, *perhaps* after she failed to 'blackmail' Carlos into a marriage as the journalist mentioned.

http://gpdhome.typepad.com/nieuwsber...lopt-niet.html

[Duc_et_Pair]

Yes, the Prince spoke about a painful episode in his life. The legal team of the Prince also pointed to the -still not worked out- question if a child has an absolute right on his donor's name or not (which would have consequences for men promised anonimity), about classificating the one right above the other right (the agreement between the two adults that there would be no paternity, that the father would not be in the registry, that the child would not have his surname) simply was a perfect legal settlement. What is the trust in the durability of legal arrangements when retroactivity is allowed: what was perfectly legal in 1980 (to a sperm donor) is retroactively overturned by a new right. What was impossible in 1997 (an extramarital child having surname and nobility from his father) became possible in 2005 because jurisprudence allowed retroactivity while this was -black on white- ruled out in the Nobility Act: overturned by other rights classified higher by Courts of Justice. The legal team of the Prince had some interesting observations.

[Marengo]

Have you read the article? It seems to imply that prince Carlos and ms Klynstra were in a relationship and not that the prince was a donor.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Marengo

Have you read the article? It seems to imply that prince Carlos and ms Klynstra were in a relationship and not that the prince was a donor.

Not the donor in the meaning of going to the sperm bank, the donor in the meaning that the pregnancy was a choice made by the mother and not by the father.

[melina premiere]

In a relationship, it happens very often that the wife wants a child and the man does not want a child ; they are not careful, for the wife because she wants a child for any reason and for the man because ir is so easy not to be careful and 9 months later a baby is born .
And than begin the trials in paternity when the father is rich, famious or at the majority of the child when he wants to know who is his father and get the name and the heritage

It seems that it is the case of the son of the duke of Parm

[Katrianna]

Decisions that may be made in years past can back with different consequences later. Shades of Prince/King Albert of the Belgians and Delphine Boel for the Duke of Parma. Human nature is what it is.

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

Not the donor in the meaning of going to the sperm bank, the donor in the meaning that the pregnancy was a choice made by the mother and not by the father.

Unless you donate sperm yo a sperm bank you aren't a donor.

Did she rape him? Force him into sex? Proof she intentionally got pregnant to ensnare him? If the answer is no to all, he is not some donor. He couldn't keep his cock in his pants and knocked his girlfriend. He is therefore a father. Just because he couldn't be bothered to take responsibility doesn't change that fact. Nor does the mother choosing not to have an abortion. For a Catholic Prince he sure doesn't embody his faith. Basically he didn't want a child, so since she refused to abort it, the mother was a single patent and he is only a donor.

The fact he named his second son Carlos speaks volumes of what he thinks of his first born son.

Carlos has every right to his fathers name and his heritage. Hopefully his mother and grandparents have shown him the strength of his maternal heritage.

It's appalling there are still royals, and Royal fans, who find this behaviour acceptable. You had a child out of wedlock. Live with it. Stop treating the child like some shameful embarrassment to be hidden.

[iceflower]

.

Princess Tania of Bourbon-Parma has posed for some photos in connection with the recording of the newest edition of the French TV show "Les grands du rire" in Paris yesterday, February 9:


** rex gallery **