Do you mean that in Britain wives legally take their husband's name and in the Netherlands they legally keep their own family name (which is why Camilla was known as Parker Bowles rather than Shand when marrying Charles; something that would be unthinkable in the Netherlands)? Because otherwise, Catherine is as Sphero indicated a commoner married to a peer and therefore known by the female form of her husband's peerage.
And if I am not mistaken the HRs the style and the 'Princess' part is the title, so for Camilla to be known as HRH The Princess Consort, I still think she would need to BE a princess. Just like the Duke of Edinburgh was made a prince. Until that moment, he was the duke of Edinburgh but not the prince consort. Since he was made a prince he is both: prince Philip and the duke of Edinburgh.
I think the way it is done in British documents is to list the name followed by the title derived from the husband. That is why you get “ Catherine Elizabeth, HRH The Duchess of Cambridge “ on George’s birth certificate.
Catherine does not use , however, the surname “Mountbatten-Windsor” in accordance with the custom of HRHs not using family names. For the wife of a peer, I suppose the norm in documents would be
[ Given Names] [ Husband’s Family Name], [Female Version of Husband’s Title]
For example,
Georgina Susan Fitzalan-Howard, Her Grace The Duchess of Norfolk
The maiden name may be added inserting, for
example, “ née Georgina Susan Gore” after the title. I believe Diana’s passport for instance included a “ née Lady Diana Francis Spencer” line after “HRH The Princess of Wales”,.
Last edited: