Prince Louis and Princess Tessy to Divorce: January 18, 2017

[Duke of Marmalade]

If you have a problem with these few innocuous photos I suggest you stay away from Marie Chantal's and Maria Olympia's instagrams, particularly the pictures of the recent double birthday celebration

I don't have a problem with these photos but in the situation they are not helpful at all. Comparisons are always difficult but the Greek royals are neither in divorce battle, nor represent a ruling house. They can flaunt their new money all they want, not that it is less tacky though.

Tessy seems like a lose cannon for the Lux family, it it tragic to see that the parties seem to be unable to separate in dignity.

 

[MARG]

It seems the divorce has turned nasty and in the last High Court appearance, with Tessy's solicitors blaming Louis for the tabloid attacks calling her a golddigger. Personally, I don't believe he has 'Privat' on his speed dial. But the UK tabloids have taken their lead from the Privat article and it's not pretty.

Whatever high ideals that were expounded in January of keeping it amicable for the children and needing to maintain good relations for the same reason appear to be up in smoke. For Tessy, she needs to remember that optics matter.

 

[maria-olivia]

I hope Prince Louis Laywer will settle an end.

 

[Soula]

I hope Prince Louis Laywer will settle an end.

And I hope that P Tessy's lawyer will obtain a fair and equitable settlement for her and the boys!

 

[MARG]

There is no way that the boys will not be taken care of. Louis is a loving father and their Grandparents would never stand for their grandchildren being shafted.

I believe that custody, school, etc. are all taken care of. It's money and the house that Tessy is going after now.

 

[Pranter]

So no prenup?


LaRae

 

[An Ard Ri]

It might have been answered above I just didn't see it but why is the divorce going through a British court in London?

 

[AdmirerUS]

They lived there. She brought the action and is more likely to get a fair deal there. They live there and the kids school there. Property there. Going to stay there, I assume.

 

[Prisma]

Luxembourg princess ‘confirms London’s divorce capital status’ | The Brief Premium

[...]

Alex Carruthers of the law firm Hughes Fowler Carruthers said that the princess made a wise decision in choosing London for the ruling. “Princess Tessy’s decision to file for divorce in London is a sensible one, as the city, in general, is one of the best jurisdictions in the world for the economically weaker party,” he said.

[...]

Neil Russell, a family partner at the law firm Seddons, said: “Divorce tourism is big business and helps make London the divorce capital of the world. England is often considered to be generous when making awards both in terms of capital and more so with maintenance.

“These drivers will be key factors for why the couple decided to divorce here. Other jurisdictions are often considered less generous in divorce, using a more formulaic approach that limits the judge’s discretion.

“Our judges look at all the circumstances of the case. However, a couple’s conduct is rarely relevant. [...]

I don't remember which divorce post but in the comment section, Luxarazzi replied that Luxembourg's divorce requires 2 years of official separation so divorcing in London is quicker.

 

[Countessmeout]

It might have been answered above I just didn't see it but why is the divorce going through a British court in London?

Deciding factor for where to file for divorce

where you married
or
where you spent the majority of your marriage
or
where the marriage fell apart

London fits two of the three of those (information from legal website). The couple live in London and don't seem to be planning to leave. That means their custody arrangement and any financial arrangements are based in London. The rulings made in divorce court are easier to enforce in the country they were made. So it makes sense to have them made in the country where they plan to reside with their kids. Where the house they are fighting over is.

There also seems to be a quicker time in London which may also help.

 

[Katrianna]

The big factor I suspect is the shorter time to obtain a divorce in the UK. It will also be interesting to see if an annulment is sought after the divorce is all over and done with. I suspect Louis will be the one to seek an annulment in time, we can't deny his family are very Catholic. As we say, "more Catholic than the Pope".

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Its an old article but imo still valid:

'Wife-Friendly' UK Prompts International Divorce Race | HuffPost UK

The tag 'wife friendly divorce' has been justified by examples such as the £48 million paid by leading insurance broker Jon Charman to his ex-wife Beverley, and the £100 million handed over by Russian tycoon Boris Berezhovsky to former spouse, Galina.

In some ways, the headlines generated by those cases and others have become a self-fulfilling prophecy. More wives in so-called ‘international marriages’ - and not just those who count themselves among the jet-set - have chosen to divorce in the UK because of an anticipated boost to their finances.

The effect has, not surprisingly, produced a response from husbands too, eager to protect as much of their assets as they can.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

The big factor I suspect is the shorter time to obtain a divorce in the UK. It will also be interesting to see if an annulment is sought after the divorce is all over and done with. I suspect Louis will be the one to seek an annulment in time, we can't deny his family are very Catholic. As we say, "more Catholic than the Pope".

That will be interesting to see if Louis does go for an annulment. Would be poor form if he did, imho. Annulment or not, under the eyes of the law, you are previously married.

 

[Biri]

I don't see reliable bases for an annulment.

 

[Pranter]

If there was any pressure by the family (either family) for them to marry that itself can be grounds for a decree of nullity. Hopefully the clergy involved with their pre-cana classes (assuming this is done there as it is here) was looking for such and can help rule this out.


LaRae

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Exactly. If there was any pressure to marry, either implied or overt, that can be grounds for an annulment. An annulment can also be granted on the grounds of extreme immaturity(I think that was the grounds for Caroline of Monaco's annulment with Philippe Junot but don't quote me because I am not certain)

Substance abuse, addiction or any kind of serious mental problem can also mean that a sacramental marriage did not exist in the first place.

Royals have the right to have their annulment cases heard directly by the pope btw.

 

[Pranter]

Yes I have a family member that was denied permission to marry, a few years ago, in the Church due to their ages/immaturity. Personally I supported the priest and bishop's decision.


LaRae

 

[Prisma]

Belgium's RTL report below. Mostly using info from UK articles except it adds that Tessy is asking to be called Tessy du (from) Luxemburg.
Dossier royal: on vous dit tout sur les raisons taboues du divorce du prince Louis et de Tessy de Luxembourg - RTL People

Tessy a même demandé à ne plus être appelée Tessy de (of) Luxembourg mais Tessy du (from) Luxemburg.

Err, can UK courts decide that? It seems, since Tessy can't keep HRH or Princess, she wants another last name instead of Antony. "du Luxemburg" sounds fancier than plain Antony.

 

[Somebody]

On Instagram Tessy started using Tessy from Luxembourg earlier this year.

I still truly hope that the UK court will just apply the Luxembourg rules instead of making up their own rules (which would be quite unfair to other Luxembourgers who also might like to make up their own surname after a divorce) which means that she reverts back to her maiden name.

Would it be possible to apply for a name change after the divorce is finalized; just because she likes to be known as 'Tessy du Luxembourg' instead of 'Tessy Antony' (so not as part of the divorce proceedings)? She can't argue that she likes to have the same surname as her children as they are 'de Nassau's, so it is really about her preferring to keep some of the aura of being a (former) princess of Luxembourg.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

I don't see reliable bases for an annulment.

A very close family member's ex-husband was granted an annulment. This family member and ex-husband were of legal capacity, it their late-20's. The marriage lasted 10 months - my very close family member left her ex-husband due to physical and mental abuse. Ex-husband find a new partner and then asked for an annulment. He was granted one simply on the reasoning that he didn't know the character of my very close family member prior to marriage. Yes, the Church accepted the reason.

My very close family member refused to get involved in the whole process. She could not believe the Church even allowed the process to get as far as it did. Unfortunately, this event caused my very close family member to turn her back on the Church.

So if Prince Louis wants an annulment, trust me, it will be granted.

 

[Pranter]

What is her married surname? Or do they even use them?


LaRae

 

[Somebody]

What is her married surname? Or do they even use them?


LaRae

De Nassau is what she used after marriage before she was elevated to the rank of princess of Luxembourg, princess of Nassau, princess of Bourbon-Parma.

 

[Somebody]

A very close family member's ex-husband was granted an annulment. This family member and ex-husband were of legal capacity, it their late-20's. The marriage lasted 10 months - my very close family member left her ex-husband due to physical and mental abuse. Ex-husband find a new partner and then asked for an annulment. He was granted one simply on the reasoning that he didn't know the character of my very close family member prior to marriage. Yes, the Church accepted the reason.

My very close family member refused to get involved in the whole process. She could not believe the Church even allowed the process to get as far as it did. Unfortunately, this event caused my very close family member to turn her back on the Church.

So if Prince Louis wants an annulment, trust me, it will be granted.

Which is one of the reasons I truly don't understand the annulment business. But I am afraid you are right: if a prince truly wants it, it most likely will be granted. Sometimes it takes more time than others, but if they want to, they will find some excuse.

I wonder whether the RC church understands the implications of their decisions in these matters on people's stand with the church... I do like that they try to keep up the holiness of matrimony but I am not sure that this is the way to do it: pretend it never existed when it is clear as day that the marriage was very real.

 

[Pranter]

In all fairness to the Marriage tribunal ...unless you see the paperwork and are involved directly it's not likely that a person knows all the details as to why decrees of nullity are granted.


LaRae

 

[Prisma]

On Instagram Tessy started using Tessy from Luxembourg earlier this year.

I still truly hope that the UK court will just apply the Luxembourg rules instead of making up their own rules (which would be quite unfair to other Luxembourgers who also might like to make up their own surname after a divorce) which means that she reverts back to her maiden name.

Would it be possible to apply for a name change after the divorce is finalized; just because she likes to be known as 'Tessy du Luxembourg' instead of 'Tessy Antony' (so not as part of the divorce proceedings)? She can't argue that she likes to have the same surname as her children as they are 'de Nassau's, so it is really about her preferring to keep some of the aura of being a (former) princess of Luxembourg.

I assume Tessy is still a Luxembourg citizen so she would apply to change her surname in Luxembourg. Not sure if she'd get approved to be "Tessy du Luxemburg".

Applying to change one's surname and/or given name(s) - Citoyens // Luxembourg

Any Luxembourg citizen, whether residing in Luxembourg or abroad, may apply for a name change. The application must be in writing, and made either personally or through a lawyer, and sent to the Minister of Justice.

The application must be justified, i.e., it must contain real and sufficiently serious reasons justifying an authorisation to change the applicant's name.

The following are examples of legitimate reasons for a name change:

• a surname or given name that is difficult to live with due to their ridiculous or pejorative sound;
• a surname or given name that sounds foreign (to facilitate integration into the country);
• a ridiculous association between the first name and the surname that could be harmful;
• a gender change (for the first name).

[...]

If the Ministry of Justice approves the application, it sends the applicant or the applicant's representative a copy of the Grand-Ducal decision authorising the change of surname or first name in return for payment of a registration fee (the amount of which ranges from EUR 61.00 to EUR 185.00).

The Grand-Ducal decision will also be published in the Official Journal (Mémorial), but will only become effective 3 months following the publication. During that period, any person with a right to do so may present a request to the Ministry of Justice to have the decision revoked. If no opposition is filed, or opposition is filed but not granted, a certificate of non-opposition will be delivered to the applicant or the applicant's representative.

[...]

 

[Somebody]

Thanks, Prisma!

 

[Somebody]

In all fairness to the Marriage tribunal ...unless you see the paperwork and are involved directly it's not likely that a person knows all the details as to why decrees of nullity are granted.

LaRae

I don't pretend to know; and I am sure they try to do their work well. My problem is mostly with the whole system itself - it is something I've never understood; especially since the idea is not applied consistently. If a marriage is really considered invalid and to never have existed, the children born within that marriage should also be considered born outside of wedlock and that is (and rightly so!) not the case.

However, so far there are no signs that either party is searching annulment, so, probably best to return to topic.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

In all fairness to the Marriage tribunal ...unless you see the paperwork and are involved directly it's not likely that a person knows all the details as to why decrees of nullity are granted.


LaRae

Yes they do. My close family member saw the reason behind the Decree of Nullity and it disgusted her. That a marriage can be deemed nullified under the eyes of the RC Church purely on some really flimsy rationalisation makes me angry!

The irony: her ex-husband remarried in a different Christian denomination. There was no need for the annulment in the first place!

 

[Countessmeout]

Legitimacy is a legal issue not a religious issue. That is where the confusion that children of an annulled marriage are not considered bastards.

Legitimacy is a legal concept dealing primarily with inheritance. There is nothing illegitimate about children of an annulled marriage in the eyes of the Church. They can still receive the sacraments, i.e. they can be baptized, receive communion, get married or become a priest, receive confirmation, et cetera.
Canon 1137 of The Code of Canon Law states that “The children conceived or born of a valid or putative marriage are legitimate.” Canon 1061 of the Code of Canon Law states that*“An invalid marriage is called putative if it has been celebrated in good faith by at least one of the parties, until both parties become certain of its nullity”. A putative marriage is a marriage in which at least one of the parties considered valid at the time of the marriage even though it was later declared invalid and annulled.*Therefore an annulment has no bearing on the status of the legitimacy of the children within the Church.
The only way for invalid children, in the eyes of the church, to be born would be if both parents never thought they were getting married, which is very difficult to occur. As legitimacy is a legal concept rather than moral, it is possible that illegitimate children become rendered canonically legitimate.

I wouldn't expect Louis or Tessy to seek one until if and when they choose to remarry. I don't know about Tessy, but Louis would likely wish to remarry in the catholic church. This isn't possible unless he has an annulment, because the Catholic church doesn't recognize divorce. Until your marriage is annulled, or your spouse dies, you cant remarry within the church. If Louis or Tessy don't mind a civil wedding if they marry someone else, then there is no cause to seek an annulment.

 

[maria-olivia]

Now we are before the Law.
For a Catholic Annulment is before the Church.
Princess Carolne never had her annulent for her Junot Wedding because she was the Daughter of a Catholic Head of State.