My understandding is that the descendants of British princesses who married into foreign families didn't have to ask permission to marry under the Royal Marriages Act, which would then exempt many foreign royals.
Curiously, when the Royal Marriages Act was repealed, previously "invalid" marriages were legitimized for all purposes except the line of succession to the British throne, precisely to minimize changes to the preexisting line. That seems to suggest that even people way down the line are not entirely neglible after all.
I’m glad you brought this up since I’m curious about it.
.
As you point out, the Succession to the Crown Act states that previously “invalid” marriages are legitimized but descendants of those marriages have no succession rights to the Crown (Section 3(5)).
Whose marriage would this affect?
Under the Royal Marriages Act a marriage contracted without the sovereign’s permission was invalid and any children were illegitimate but the person who made the marriage could still inherit the throne. But under the Succession to the Crown Act the situation is reversed. The unapproved marriage would be valid and the children legitimate but the person contracting the marriage and the children would not have any succession rights (Section 3(3)).
So it seems Section 3(5) might be intended to place
prior unapproved marriages on the same level as
future unapproved marriages. The prior marriage is now recognized as valid, the children are legitimate, but have no succession rights.
However, one of the requirements of Section 3(5) states: “in all the circumstances it was reasonable for the person concerned
not to have been aware at the time of the marriage that the Act applied to it.” (3(5)(c)).
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/20/pdfs/ukpga_20130020_en.pdf
This requirement narrows the number of eligible marriages. I suspect it was made with specific marriages in mind, for example George IV’s secret marriage to Mrs. Fitzherbert. He knew he was required to ask permission, but didn’t, so under the Succession to the Crown Act the marriage is still invalid. Ditto for Augustus Duke of Sussex’s two marriages and George Duke of Cambridge’s marriage to Sarah Fairbrother. Neither asked permission so their marriages are still invalid and their children are still considered illegitimate.
But who didn’t ask permission because they didn’t
know they were required to? As you stated, the descendants of princesses who married into foreign families were exempt from the RMA, so the number of people who fell within it was actually small. So whose marriage would now be legal under the provisions of Section 3(5)?
This has been discussed on another forum as it relates to the descendants of Queen Victoria’s grandson Charles Edward Duke of Albany and of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. His children didn’t seek approval for their marriages making them invalid under British law. So their descendants had no succession rights to the British crown or to the Albany title (the Titles Deprivation Act aside). But the Succession to the Crown Act means they might be able to claim the latter, if it could be proven they weren’t aware that the Royal Marriages Act applied to them. For example, by then they were “foreign” royals and may have believed they were exempt. But how would that be proven given that the parties are dead?
Does anyone have any additional insights on this? Thank you. I learn a lot from these discussions and debates and find them very interesting.
