header-logo header-logo

What’s in a name? (Pt 1)

28 April 2017 / Michael L Nash
Issue: 7743 / Categories: Features , Public , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail
nlj_7743_nash

In its centenary year, Michael L Nash reflects on the birth of the House of Windsor

It was the King’s secretary who thought of it. ‘Do you realise,’ wrote Lord Rosebery to Arthur Bigge, later Lord Stamfordham, ‘that you have christened a dynasty? There are few people in the world who have done this, none I think. It is really something to be historically proud of. I admire and envy you.’

Thus it was that on 24 June 1917, Lord Stamfordham suddenly and simply put forward the name ‘Windsor’ when there appeared to be a deadlock in choosing a name for the Royal Family of Britain. Why was this necessary? Because, in response to disturbing rumours of the German connections and origin of the Royal Family during World War I, King George V took not one, but a series of actions which, at least on the surface, changed the face of that family, and ensured it took a different direction. The legal nature of these changes was, and has always been,

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll