header-logo header-logo

08 May 2015 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7651 / Categories: Opinion , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Game of thrones

nlj_may_8_princess

Neil Parpworth examines the impact of the Succession to the Crown Act 2013

Although the Succession to the Crown Act 2013 received Royal Assent on 25 April 2013, its key provisions did not enter into force until 26 March 2015: see the Succession to the Crown Act 2013 (Commencement) Order 2015 (SI 2015/894). It is a constitutionally important measure since it addresses several pieces of discrimination relating to the monarchy.

Succession

Hitherto, succession to the Crown has been determined by applying the common law principle of male preference primogeniture. On the death of a monarch, the throne has normally passed to their eldest and nearest male relative (usually a son), and the line of succession has been constructed accordingly.

Under s 1 of the 2013 Act, succession to the Crown is no longer dependent on gender. In the case of persons born after 28 October 2011, their place in the line of succession depends solely on when they were born. In practice, of course, the new succession arrangements are unlikely to have much effect

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll