header-logo header-logo

19 February 2016 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7687 / Categories: Features , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Complications of a queen

Michael L Nash considers the legal pitfalls of Mary Tudor & Queen Elizabeth II

This week marks the 500th anniversary of the birth of our first Queen regnant, Mary Tudor, the elder daughter of Henry VIII. After the paralysing disappointment of the birth and death of a boy and heir in 1511, Mary was born in the Palace of Greenwich on 18 February 1516. She was baptised the following Wednesday in the monastery of Greyfriars with all the solemnity due to her rank.

Rather different was the birth and baptism of the future Elizabeth II in 1926. She was born in a private house at 17 Bruton Street, a few yards from Bond Street on 21 April 1926. She was christened by Dr Cosmo Gordon Lang, then Archbishop of York, in the private chapel of Buckingham Palace on 29 May 1926.

Both the house in which she was born, and the chapel where she was christened, were destroyed in the Blitz. When she became Queen, Elizabeth II rebuilt the chapel, which is now

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll