Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Marquess of Bath  (Read 68087 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
identitycrisis

Warned
Baby Member
*

Reputation: 30

Offline Offline

Posts: 90





Ignore
« Reply #150 on: January 09, 2017, 02:25:10 PM »

^^^^^^ Star
European courts, including UK, have upheld judgements in other family cases from US courts such as custody and marriage .  The US courts have likewise reciprocated .  Generally courts from Western democratic nations have been loathe to outright strike down reasoned judgements  without careful considerations.  From what I have read, the Weymouths took a very considered decision in where their baby was conceived/born.  I am sure they have acted on the very best British legal advice money can buy.  They are wealthy aristocrats;  no way would they put their family's succession rights in jeopardy.  As someone said up thread, where there is a will, there is a way.
No English court has upheld anything at all regarding surrogacy and inheritance of peerages. This isn't about whether the child can inherit cars or art. It's about whether he can inherit peerages. There is no precedent to allow a child born of a surrogate to inherit a family's peerage titles and no indication that parliament or the monarch will alter the Letters Patent to allow a child born of a surrogate to inherit a family's peerage titles.
Logged
Herazeus

Warned
Medium Member
*****

Reputation: 595

Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1026





Ignore
« Reply #151 on: January 09, 2017, 02:40:46 PM »

Getafix: what identitycrisis said.

Margaret: You are looking at this as a regular variety law. For regular people, i do not disagree with you and you are correct. A few lawyers here and there and viola, change happens.

However, what you fail to understand is peerage laws that govern the aristocracy. Cases come up all the time. For daughters, for adopted, for illegitimate (where child is title holder's child, but from a mistress or before marriage). And each case is treated as a special case that requires major lobbying of parliamenterians, constitutional experts and occassionally the privy council with no guarantee of outcome.

It makes no difference that in common law these cases would either not be an issue or are common garden variety uncomplicated cases which should be rubber stamped. No such case has ever been decided by the courts no matter the private agreements between correspondents that have basis in common law.

The aristocracy is very resistant to any changes to these archaic laws and always resist every time one such case crops up. They never treat them as setting a precedent to be followed, but act as if it's the first time it has come up.

As an example, when the succession law was being discussed and rushed through parliament to remove gender bias to inheritance of the British throne in 2013-2015, Charles pointed out the need to overhaul the peerage laws to remove all these anomalies, and he was shut down.

There has been a movement for many years petitioning parliament to change these laws starting with the daughters, and no bueno.

Logged
PeDe
Board Helper
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 5186

Offline Offline

Germany Germany

Posts: 27535





Ignore
« Reply #152 on: January 09, 2017, 05:32:33 PM »

Lady Weymouth said that the reason they contracted with a surrogate in California and the baby was born in California was because that California had the strictest laws in the US , protecting the legal parents. The parents are the legal and biological child of the parents per California law.  She said they deliberately avoided his conception and birth in the UK because of the  UK laws.  I postulate they consulted with a British attorney expert in inheritance law prior to the baby being conceived, to nail all of this down in inheritance, etc.  The aristocrats play by different rules than everybody else.


Wonderful! Thanks for the info EA  Thumb up  Star


Problem solved....now we can move on from the inheritance law, and fawn over that they have a healthy child, love each other, their children, and are happy and healthy.
Logged

pixiecat
Board Helper
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 4415

Offline Offline

Cuba Cuba

Posts: 26552


Pixiecat loves to Dish!




Ignore
« Reply #153 on: January 09, 2017, 05:40:06 PM »

Lady Weymouth said that the reason they contracted with a surrogate in California and the baby was born in California was because that California had the strictest laws in the US , protecting the legal parents. The parents are the legal and biological child of the parents per California law.  She said they deliberately avoided his conception and birth in the UK because of the  UK laws.  I postulate they consulted with a British attorney expert in inheritance law prior to the baby being conceived, to nail all of this down in inheritance, etc.  The aristocrats play by different rules than everybody else.


Wonderful! Thanks for the info EA  Thumb up  Star


Problem solved....now we can move on from the inheritance law, and fawn over that they have a healthy child, love each other, their children, and are happy and healthy.

Exactly.  These stupid laws and nit-picky snobbiness behind them are the reason why this nonsense will ultimately die out (and rightfully so). 

Good for the family, and I wish them nothing but happiness.
Logged

All hail the future King Nobstante!!
Knight Grand Cross in the Order of the Whorish Spanx
https://31.media.tumblr.c...ine_mzekcuA9Ln1snsa9a.jpg
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: