header-logo header-logo

07 November 2025 / Dr Graham Zellick CBE KC FAcSS
Issue: 8138 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

A prince no more, but a duke still

235020
Professor Graham Zellick KC on why Andrew Mountbatten Windsor remains a duke

Following Buckingham Palace’s statement last month, the public will doubtless have concluded that the former Prince Andrew would lose his title of Prince and his peerage as a duke, as well as his other honours and dignities (I refer to him hereafter as ‘Andrew’, which sounds less jarring than Mr Mountbatten Windsor).

The opening words of the statement were: ‘His Majesty has today initiated a formal process to remove the Style, Titles and Honours of Prince Andrew.’ I assume, but do not know, that the king has exercised his undoubted prerogative powers to withdraw the honorific of ‘His Royal Highness’ and the title of Prince, and cancel his two knighthoods (of the Garter and the Royal Victorian Order). Anyone reading the statement would inevitably conclude that his dukedom was also being formally removed, especially as the earlier statement had already indicated that he had decided no longer to use the title.

We

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll