header-logo header-logo

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

What’s in a name? (Pt 1)

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll