General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Ive gorn an' bought me 'at now !

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

SheilaSomerset

SheilaSomerset Report 14 Feb 2005 12:58

I remember on the first day it was announced that some bod said it would require a change in legislation for them to have a civil ceremony!

Geoff

Geoff Report 14 Feb 2005 12:56

Common law marriages ceased in England in 1753.

Joy

Joy Report 14 Feb 2005 12:48

from the net: A BBC Panorama investigation revealed there was confusion whether the couple could be legally married in a civil wedding at Windsor Castle. The programme said the 1836 Marriage Act allowed for civil marriages in England for the first time, with the exemption of the Royal Family. It was updated in 1949 when no specific changes were made to the royal exemption. Dr Stephen Cretney QC, Emeritus Fellow of Legal History, Oxford University, said he found it impossible to understand how a civil marriage for the couple in England could be legal. He said: 'There is no statutory procedure whereby members of the Royal Family can marry in a register office. Although there may be this ceremony and public rejoicing, it could be the Prince of Wales is not married and Mrs Parker Bowles is not his wife, and constitutionally it’s important to know whether they are married or not.' According to the programme, the Government and Buckingham Palace have taken advice from several independent lawyers who have advised the marriage would be legal. Clarence House told the programme it believed the 1949 Act was not a continuation of the first Act but a completely new one which did not specifically prevent members of the Royal Family from having civil marriages.

PinkDiana

PinkDiana Report 14 Feb 2005 12:41

God I am pleased it's proving hard for the adulterous.... Ooops i mean adorable couple!!

ஐ+*¨^¨*+e+*¨^¨*+ஐ Mildred Honkinbottom

ஐ+*¨^¨*+e+*¨^¨*+ஐ Mildred Honkinbottom Report 14 Feb 2005 12:33

WEDDING PLANS HIT SNAG Prince Charles's civil marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles could be illegal because of a 169-year-old law. The 1836 Marriage Act gave birth to civil marriages in England, with the exemption of the Royal Family. Legal and royal experts are now poring over the law and an update in 1949 to see if it needs changing. Aides to the Prince believe the amendment was not an extension of the 1836 Act but a new one which did not single out the Royal Family. Prince Charles, 56, announced last Thursday that he would wed Camilla, 57, at a civil ceremony in Windsor Castle on April 8. But doubts over whether this can happen have been raised by Dr Stephen Cretney QC, Emeritus Fellow of Legal History at Oxford University. He told BBC's Panorama programme: 'There is no statutory procedure whereby members of the Royal Family can marry in a register office. 'Although there may be this ceremony and public rejoicing it could be the Prince of Wales is not married and Mrs Parker Bowles is not his wife.' If the law does prevent their civil marriage, the couple have four courses open to them. They could either wed in Scotland, call for a change in the law, have a common law marriage or appeal under the Human Rights Act

ஐ+*¨^¨*+e+*¨^¨*+ஐ Mildred Honkinbottom

ஐ+*¨^¨*+e+*¨^¨*+ஐ Mildred Honkinbottom Report 14 Feb 2005 12:33

hehe even the royals have problems....