header-logo header-logo

20 November 2015 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7677 / Categories: Features , Public
printer mail-detail

Opening Pandora’s box

nlj_7677_nash

Michael L Nash discusses DNA & disputed titles

“I am my father’s son, according to my mother”, runs an old saying, but now the advent of DNA testing and techniques has added another factor to the equation.

On 11 October 2015 it was reported that the Queen, in a most unusual step, had referred a disputed titles case to the Baronetage Committee of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, something which had not been done since 1927.

This most august body, composed of senior judges from Britain and the Commonwealth, meets in informal style in Whitehall, governed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Act of 1833. It is under s 4 of this Act that the Queen has made the referral. The section states: “Her Majesty may refer any other matters to the Committee”, a kind of catch-all section for matters on which the Queen seeks advice. The judgments of the Judicial Committtee take the form of advice to the Queen, but they have the same status as those of the Supreme Court.

The case in question concerns the baronetcy of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll