RIP Philip

[Principessa]

https://www.nu.nl/achterk...stament-prins-philip.html

Loosly translated as:

The Guardian wants access to Prince Philip's will sooner than in 90 years

British newspaper The Guardian is going to challenge a decision over the secrecy of Prince Philip's will. The newspaper has been cleared by the British Supreme Court to start a case seeking to reverse the decision to keep the will secret for 90 years.

Last September, the judge ruled that the will of Philip, who died in April 2021, must remain secret for 90 years. This was decided to protect the privacy of members of the British Royal Family. The hearing was held privately. Media organizations were not allowed to attend and were not informed of the hearing.

For that reason, The Guardian wants the hearing to be redone and thus the decision to be reversed. According to the newspaper, the hearing surrounding the prince's will was contrary to the open legal system.

Under British law, wills of deceased persons must always be made public, but exceptions have been made for members of the royal family. Since 1910 this has happened to more than thirty relatives, including distant relatives. All these requests were also handled behind closed doors.

In November, the British Supreme Court said it was prepared to release the list of sealed wills for reasons of transparency. The content will remain hidden.

[Princess MS]

https://www.nu.nl/achterk...stament-prins-philip.html

Loosly translated as:

The Guardian wants access to Prince Philip's will sooner than in 90 years

British newspaper The Guardian is going to challenge a decision over the secrecy of Prince Philip's will. The newspaper has been cleared by the British Supreme Court to start a case seeking to reverse the decision to keep the will secret for 90 years.

Last September, the judge ruled that the will of Philip, who died in April 2021, must remain secret for 90 years. This was decided to protect the privacy of members of the British Royal Family. The hearing was held privately. Media organizations were not allowed to attend and were not informed of the hearing.

For that reason, The Guardian wants the hearing to be redone and thus the decision to be reversed. According to the newspaper, the hearing surrounding the prince's will was contrary to the open legal system.

Under British law, wills of deceased persons must always be made public, but exceptions have been made for members of the royal family. Since 1910 this has happened to more than thirty relatives, including distant relatives. All these requests were also handled behind closed doors.

In November, the British Supreme Court said it was prepared to release the list of sealed wills for reasons of transparency. The content will remain hidden.

So the only assets he had came from the old Civil List disbursements.... I’m sure he spent a token amount as everything else was paid for..... so decades of handouts....

[LadyBunion]

I don't think the will would tell them much - it is unlikely to be actual amounts (unless they were specific bequests eg £1,000 to X) - the bulk of it will be "in trust to be divided between A,B,C,D etc" - amount undefined 

[A Citizen not a Subject]

https://www.nu.nl/achterk...stament-prins-philip.html

Loosly translated as:

The Guardian wants access to Prince Philip's will sooner than in 90 years

British newspaper The Guardian is going to challenge a decision over the secrecy of Prince Philip's will. The newspaper has been cleared by the British Supreme Court to start a case seeking to reverse the decision to keep the will secret for 90 years.

Last September, the judge ruled that the will of Philip, who died in April 2021, must remain secret for 90 years. This was decided to protect the privacy of members of the British Royal Family. The hearing was held privately. Media organizations were not allowed to attend and were not informed of the hearing.

For that reason, The Guardian wants the hearing to be redone and thus the decision to be reversed. According to the newspaper, the hearing surrounding the prince's will was contrary to the open legal system.

Under British law, wills of deceased persons must always be made public, but exceptions have been made for members of the royal family. Since 1910 this has happened to more than thirty relatives, including distant relatives. All these requests were also handled behind closed doors.

In November, the British Supreme Court said it was prepared to release the list of sealed wills for reasons of transparency. The content will remain hidden.

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

[Aubiette]

I don’t think anyone’s will should be public so I hope they lose. If they win then the Queens will be made public as well I presume? The Guardian is just trying to stir up crap IMO.

[periwinkle]

I just think Philip's will is probably a snooze fest for someone who didn't need to worry about cash flow and was born and lived at the top of the social food chain. He didn't come into the marriage with much and may have been given a trinket here or there. My theory is still that he had more of his own watercolor paintings than money or valuables. Those watercolors however would be worth something if they were auctioned off for charity.

[anneboleyn]

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

I agree, I think their wills should be public. I understand they're royalty and so they have a different lifestyle than the rest of us plebs, but I think legal documents should be transparent. Their birth certificates are public knowledge so I'm not sure why wills should be treated any differently. If something is publicly accessible to the public for a regular citizen, then it should be the same for royalty.

[A Citizen not a Subject]

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

I agree, I think their wills should be public. I understand they're royalty and so they have a different lifestyle than the rest of us plebs, but I think legal documents should be transparent. Their birth certificates are public knowledge so I'm not sure why wills should be treated any differently. If something is publicly accessible to the public for a regular citizen, then it should be the same for royalty.

Exactly this.  I have no problem with his will being private if we mere plebs are given that option for ours, it's the double standards I can't stand.

[Lady Liebe]

I will fully admit genealogically I find looking at my ancestor's wills interesting. But I fully get the point of privacy or no privacy for everyone, regardless of status.

I suspect Phillip put anything interesting in a trust long ago. The will is probably things left to staff and friends.

It costs a bit more to form a trust in the US than to do a simple will, but it is not public, and there is no probate.

[BaronSulney]

I don’t think anyone’s will should be public so I hope they lose. If they win then the Queens will be made public as well I presume? The Guardian is just trying to stir up crap IMO.

I agree. If they win, I hope it backfires on them as with Charles' letters & memos.

[Celia]

He received hundreds of thousands of pounds over the years from the Civil List.  He did indeed come in to the marriage with almost nothing --just a couple of suits (I think one was his father's).  He had to use one of his mother's tiaras as the source for diamonds for the engagement ring and bracelet.  I think people want to know how much he left so they can scream "leech!"

[Gemsheal]

https://www.nu.nl/achterk...stament-prins-philip.html

Loosly translated as:

The Guardian wants access to Prince Philip's will sooner than in 90 years

British newspaper The Guardian is going to challenge a decision over the secrecy of Prince Philip's will. The newspaper has been cleared by the British Supreme Court to start a case seeking to reverse the decision to keep the will secret for 90 years.

Last September, the judge ruled that the will of Philip, who died in April 2021, must remain secret for 90 years. This was decided to protect the privacy of members of the British Royal Family. The hearing was held privately. Media organizations were not allowed to attend and were not informed of the hearing.

For that reason, The Guardian wants the hearing to be redone and thus the decision to be reversed. According to the newspaper, the hearing surrounding the prince's will was contrary to the open legal system.

Under British law, wills of deceased persons must always be made public, but exceptions have been made for members of the royal family. Since 1910 this has happened to more than thirty relatives, including distant relatives. All these requests were also handled behind closed doors.

In November, the British Supreme Court said it was prepared to release the list of sealed wills for reasons of transparency. The content will remain hidden.

I do feel strongly that no legal hearing should be held "privately".   That does smack of favoritism, elitism, and cover-up ...   

He probably made some personal bequests to women friends (such as Penelope, Countess Mountbatten), and the family doesn't want his alleged romance(s) with such people raked up all over again. 

Ironically, I don't actually feel strongly that Philip's Will is being sealed, but I do mind about the Queen Mother's.  Now, there, would have been some creative trusts, legal language and/or creative bookkeeping going on.   I would love to see that one.     

[Hester]

I don’t think anyone’s will should be public so I hope they lose. If they win then the Queens will be made public as well I presume? The Guardian is just trying to stir up crap IMO.

Same here. The Guardian is sniffing around for scuttlebutt and evidence of mistresses.

[ralf103]

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

I agree, I think their wills should be public. I understand they're royalty and so they have a different lifestyle than the rest of us plebs, but I think legal documents should be transparent. Their birth certificates are public knowledge so I'm not sure why wills should be treated any differently. If something is publicly accessible to the public for a regular citizen, then it should be the same for royalty.

Exactly this.  I have no problem with his will being private if we mere plebs are given that option for ours, it's the double standards I can't stand.

I think is the pain point - do people really want royal wills made public or is that just because everyone else's has to be public and don't have the option of making it private. Personally I don't think anyones will should be public so don't see why Philip's should be, but I understand people will feel it is unfair for his to be private while theirs can't be.

Truly, personally, I think Philip's will would be pretty boring. I suspect most things will have been left in Trust long ago - he was 99 years old and the Queen Mother put nearly all her assets in trust long before her death and Princess Margaret did the same giving her Mustique home to her son long enough before she died for it to qualify for the 7 year rule.

I suspect, as a very unmaterialistic man Philip would have been more likely to include bequests to staff, dividing up his library and other sentimental items such as horses, carriages etc than a long list of financial bequests.

Honestly, I can't see how Philip made millions out of his Civil List allowance. At very most he may have done so in the early days but really for years it was frozen at £359,000 a year. The Queen Mother was heavily in debt with almost £200,000 more than that.

[leatherface]

I hope they win. A will is a public document in the UK. Mine will be, hopefully still a good few years from now, so why shouldn’t his?

I agree, I think their wills should be public. I understand they're royalty and so they have a different lifestyle than the rest of us plebs, but I think legal documents should be transparent. Their birth certificates are public knowledge so I'm not sure why wills should be treated any differently. If something is publicly accessible to the public for a regular citizen, then it should be the same for royalty.

Exactly this.  I have no problem with his will being private if we mere plebs are given that option for ours, it's the double standards I can't stand.

I think is the pain point - do people really want royal wills made public or is that just because everyone else's has to be public and don't have the option of making it private. Personally I don't think anyones will should be public so don't see why Philip's should be, but I understand people will feel it is unfair for his to be private while theirs can't be.

Truly, personally, I think Philip's will would be pretty boring. I suspect most things will have been left in Trust long ago - he was 99 years old and the Queen Mother put nearly all her assets in trust long before her death and Princess Margaret did the same giving her Mustique home to her son long enough before she died for it to qualify for the 7 year rule.

I suspect, as a very unmaterialistic man Philip would have been more likely to include bequests to staff, dividing up his library and other sentimental items such as horses, carriages etc than a long list of financial bequests.

Honestly, I can't see how Philip made millions out of his Civil List allowance. At very most he may have done so in the early days but really for years it was frozen at £359,000 a year. The Queen Mother was heavily in debt with almost £200,000 more than that.

Same here ralf, wills administer personal property and should remain private.