Princess Delphine & Family, News & Events 1; 2020 - 2023

[leidi]

I don't think Queen Paola can be held responsible for the choices of her (unfaithful) spouse.

Paola made it CRYSTAL clear to Albert that he had to sever all ties to Sybille and Delphine if he wanted to stay married to her and I think she has been pushing all these years for the matter to "go away" as well.

Yes, ultimately it was Albert's choice to cheat but Paola's choice to sweep the issue under the rug was also a part of this whole mess.

 

[Prinsara]

Paola made it CRYSTAL clear to Albert that he had to sever all ties to Sybille and Delphine if he wanted to stay married to her and I think she has been pushing all these years for the matter to "go away" as well.

Yes, ultimately it was Albert's choice to cheat but Paola's choice to sweep the issue under the rug was also a part of this whole mess.

But he didn't sever ties to Delphine; they kept in contact until 1999. Either Paola chose not to know, Albert was better at hiding it, or she was okay with an extremely limited amount of non-cheating contact.

 

[Somebody]

The contentious words in Article 2 are as follows.

les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe de Sa Majesté le Roi Albert II portent le titre de Prince ou de Princesse de Belgique
​

Translated literally into English:

the Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, in direct descent from His Majesty King Albert II carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium
​

To illustrate my meaning, replace these terms:

Replace "the Princes and the Princesses" with "Philippe and Astrid".
Replace "children and grandchildren" with "children".
Replace "carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium" with "receive €1".


The wording that results ought to be

Philippe and Astrid, children in direct descent from His Majesty King Albert II receive €1
​

Following from the earlier discussions here, two possible interpretations suggested by that wording could be

- All of Albert's children qualify to be Philippe and Astrid (and to receive €1). Laurent and Delphine receive the new names Philippe and Astrid, and they become €1 wealthier.​

- The decree is meant to apply only to children of Albert who are already named Philippe or Astrid. Laurent and Delphine keep the same names but miss out on the €1.​

The first one strikes me as more reasonable. But again, I realize it may sound different in French than in the translation, and I would like to hear from various fluent speakers of French.

You omit one very important detail: a comma!

'children and grandchildren' can be omitted for the primary meaning to remain the same.

So, without this subordinate phrase it reads "Princes and Princesses in direct descent from HM King Albert II carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium"

So, children and grandchildren is somehow a specification of those princes and princesses in direct descent.

If we go a completely different route:
Cats and dogs living in the streets are put in shelters.

Adding a subordinate phrase:
Cats and dogs, smaller and bigger animals, living in the streets are put in shelters.

In the example above, it mainly confirms that it applies to cats and dogs independent of their size.

IF: However the order was different:
Smaller and bigger animals, cats and dogs, living in the streets are put in shelters.

Now, it suddenly seems to change the meaning as no longer all smaller and bigger animals living in the streets are put in shelters but only the cats and dogs...

Not sure, what this exercise teaches us about the interpretation of the Royal Decree (other than: we really need to understand how those two parts of the sentence should be linked together; is it X equals Y?; is it a restriction?, is it irrelevant information? but it is clear that it wasn't phrased clearly because it can be easily interpreted differently.

 

[cathy50]

I feel Delphine might have opened Pandors's box considerung the future of her children.
I do not know how they live and where they go to school but what if the yellow press is now after them, paparazzis chasing them, what somebody decides to kidnap one hoping Philippe will pay? I guess the OHares have no security....
Tragic ahead for the children and both the royal family if such things will occur .
What when Albert dies, will Delphine be allowed to say Good bye and if not what will she make it up in the media, Philip the cruel halfbrother who kept her from the final goodbye.....

One can only hope the husband OHare is smart enough to protect his children from what their mother has caused. I do not think Delphine has thought the thing to the end. but maybe a castle and security paid for her family is the next thing on her list?

Plus she cannot be controlled, as fa as now her art concentrated on Albert, but she commmented on ongoing things like covid and belgium is a rather badly balanced country,
what if she starts to get into political discussions ( she can surely be a threat to the king with things like that), I fear she will be an uncontrollable problem to all of them.

I do not know the belgique media and if Philippe could ask them to be silent about her, but if not there is much much trouble ahead as she has proofed to be only interested in making money.... (look at her vita, she was asked for exhibitions only after she was known to be alberts child and sujets like identity, blabla ....it's all focused on Albert, she was a zero before).

Albert might die in the coming decade but Delphine will likely be there for another 30 years
one can only hope she finds different things to focus on.

 

[Marengo]

But he didn't sever ties to Delphine; they kept in contact until 1999. Either Paola chose not to know, Albert was better at hiding it, or she was okay with an extremely limited amount of non-cheating contact.

Paola knew about Delphine. In the early days of Albert's affair she even visited Sybille Selys de Longchamps in Knokke with her flashy sports car. They walked in the pouring rain and Paola tried to talk to her and find a way how all of them could go along. Sybille claims that she was flabbergasted.

Later on the situation changed. Sybille herself said in the television interview in 2013 that -although she had few kind words for Paola- she did not believe that it was Paola who was behind the King's change of attitude towards Delphine. She is convinced that some high ranking members of the Belgian catholic church were behind it all. I am not sure if that is Delphine's opinion too. In the past she may have said that Paola was to blame, though over the course of 22 years I suppose these feelings may alter.

 

[Prinsara]

Paola knew about Delphine. In the early days of Albert's affair she even visited Sybille Selys de Longchamps in Knokke with her flashy sports car. They walked in the pouring rain and Paola tried to talk to her and find a way how all of them could go along. Sybille claims that she was flabbergasted.

Later on the situation changed. Sybille herself said in the television interview in 2013 that -although she had few kind words for Paola- she did not believe that it was Paola who was behind the King's change of attitude towards Delphine. She is convinced that some high ranking members of the Belgian catholic church were behind it all. I am not sure if that is Delphine's opinion too. In the past she may have said that Paola was to blame, though over the course of 22 years I suppose these feelings may alter.

I meant "Paola (presumably) knew he was still talking to Delphine after reconciling their marriage", so severing all contact wasn't a pre-condition. I'm both surprised and not surprised she tried to talk to Sybille back in the day, but I can't tell if you mean it was friendly (!!) or not.

 

[rominet09]

I think Delphine has never married.

 

[Denville]

I think Delphine has never married.

My understanding is that she was married to a man called OHare

 

[Addapalla]

My understanding is that she was married to a man called OHare

We know they are long-term partners, so at least Mr. O'Hare is her common law husband by some countries' legal definition (not sure re: Belgium / EU).

As we often see the press mislabel a royal's girlfriend as his “fiancée,” perhaps they have been equally sloppy in assuming that Delphine and Mr. O'Hare are married in the more formal sense because they have had a long relationship and two children.

 

[tihkon2]

Delphine and Mr. O'Hare are not married. They are in a long term relationship.

 

[Denville]

Delphine and Mr. O'Hare are not married. They are in a long term relationship.

Says in Wikipedia that she married him. I know it isn't alwasy accurate but I would assume they get basic things right...

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Says in Wikipedia that she married him. I know it isn't alwasy accurate but I would assume they get basic things right...

I do not know about the marriage, but Wikipedia does not "always get basic things right". As only one example, it falsely reports that Astrid and her family use HI&RH. The reality is that they always use HRH (with the exception of Amedeo's children, who are not entitled to use HRH).

https://www.monarchie.be/en/royal-family/princess-astrid
https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/c..._date=2015-11-24&numac=2015021074&caller=list

 

[leticia.h]

I’m not surprised she got the surname Saxe Coburg but I am totally shocked that she has been given titles! She is illegitimate and this doesn’t change that!

me too!
I thought only legitimate children got titles

 

[Prinsara]

I do not know about the marriage, but Wikipedia does not "always get basic things right". As only one example, it falsely reports that Astrid and her family use HI&RH. The reality is that they always use HRH (with the exception of Amedeo's children, who are not entitled to use HRH).

https://www.monarchie.be/en/royal-family/princess-astrid
https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/c..._date=2015-11-24&numac=2015021074&caller=list

Josephine was born in 2003 and has always used the last name O'Hare, until now. Didn't I see something that if Delphine and Jim were not married at that date (and I know they weren't) she would have had to have used Delphine's last name? Now I'm confused.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Josephine was born in 2003 and has always used the last name O'Hare, until now. Didn't I see something that if Delphine and Jim were not married at that date (and I know they weren't) she would have had to have used Delphine's last name? Now I'm confused.

Under the Civil Code at that date in 2003, a child automatically bore the name of their (legal) father from birth, with the exception of children whose father had been married to a woman other than the mother at the time of the conception. These children, and children born without a legally recognized father, bore the name of their mother.

You can reach older versions of the Civil Code using the link at the upper right corner of the page.

https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/eli/wet/1804/03/21/1804032150/justel
https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/eli/loi/1804/03/21/1804032150/justel

me too!
I thought only legitimate children got titles

That is how most titles in Belgium are inherited.

If the applicants consider themselves to be the legitimate direct descendent, in the male line, of an ancestor who belonged to the nobility in our regions until the end of the 'Ancien Régime' (i.e. until the abolition of the nobility in the French era) or who was officially a member of the nobility in his country of origin, they may lodge an application for recognition of nobility.
​

https://diplomatie.belgium.be/en/services/Protocol/nobility_and_honorary_distinctions/nobility/faq

 

[Prinsara]

Under the Civil Code at that date in 2003, a child automatically bore the name of their (legal) father from birth, with the exception of children whose father had been married to a woman other than the mother at the time of the conception. These children, and children born without a legally recognized father, bore the name of their mother.

You mean you have a legal father if your parents are not married, to themselves or to anyone else, then? Because I don't think Josephine has ever been known as Boel (and would have surely been the LAST thing Delphine wanted).

 

[Denville]

You mean you have a legal father if your parents are not married, to themselves or to anyone else, then? Because I don't think Josephine has ever been known as Boel (and would have surely been the LAST thing Delphine wanted).

well is she or was she married to this OHare man?

 

[An Ard Ri]

Its not just on Wikipedia its on mainstream new sites that Delphine is married to an American , James O'Hare?

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/in-royal-circles-21-4-08/17/

 

[Tatiana Maria]

You mean you have a legal father if your parents are not married, to themselves or to anyone else, then?

Read here about the procedures that can be utilized by unmarried parents to have a man legally recognized as the father of a woman's child.

https://diplomatie.belgium.be/en/services/services_abroad/registry/acknowledgement_of_parentage

I have not looked to see whether those procedures were in existence in 2003, but that can be done using the links provided in my previous post.

 

[Prinsara]

"If the Belgian father is married to a woman other than the child’s mother, his spouse must be informed of the acknowledgement of this child by either registered post or bailiff."

Um, Paola? Your Majesty? Sorry. You'll probably be tossing that one in the trash. (Oh, dear.)

 

[sophie25]

Albert is taking all the flak for this situation but it takes two to tango. Delphine's mother claims she didn't think she could get pregnant and no one other than her knows if that's true or not but the bottom line is that she was having sex with a married man so she's as much to blame for this whole sorry mess as Albert is.

 

[Prinsara]

Albert is taking all the flak for this situation but it takes two to tango. Delphine's mother claims she didn't think she could get pregnant and no one other than her knows if that's true or not but the bottom line is that she was having sex with a married man so she's as much to blame for this whole sorry mess as Albert is.

Actually Sybille had been married to her husband for a number of years without becoming pregnant and had never been pregnant before, so she seems to have had some justification for believing it. And it's Albert's fault for believing her, and for having pursued a married woman whose husband was a royalist who made no fuss about claiming their child. And back and forth we go.

Edit: Sybille also seems to have been a loving and careful parent and a (formerly) discreet mistress, and has been very supportive of her daughter while (somehow) still having a measure of fondness about Albert. Which is better than appearing vindictive.

Albert dropped Delphine like a stone when she became too inconvenient. That's why he gets blamed, and that's why he's far more to blame. Sybille is not the one who denied and lied to their child.

 

[leidi]

https://plus.lesoir.be/329440/artic...ecu-une-celebrite-de-la-honte-present-je-peux

Delphine gave an interview to Le Soir, does anyone have full access to it?

 

[Reinosa]

Albert dropped Delphine like a stone when she became too inconvenient. That's why he gets blamed, and that's why he's far more to blame. Sybille is not the one who denied and lied to their child.

From time to time I read this thread and from time to time I find people saying exactly what I think. Thanks, Prinsara.

 

[leidi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1312977815495737345

Well, something tells me she's gonna cash in on this for all it's worth... ¬¬

 

[Skippy]

https://www.hln.be/showbizz/royalty...ilde-was-een-gesprek-met-mijn-vader~a4693025/

All she really wanted was a conversation with her father, an explanation why he denied her being his daughter.
She tries to understand him, sees mitigating circumstances for his behaviour.

The entire time, she hoped for a signal from her father, to privately work it out. But nothing. That's why she decided to have the law prove whether she was right. She never expected to win.

She doesn't expect anything anymore from the royal palace and doesn't ask for anything anymore.

 

[lucien]

https://www.hln.be/showbizz/royalty...ilde-was-een-gesprek-met-mijn-vader~a4693025/

All she really wanted was a conversation with her father, an explanation why he denied her being his daughter.
She tries to understand him, sees mitigating circumstances for his behaviour.

And what did she get instead of the man that used to visit her regularly and gave her presents as a child?Snubbed.
OK,that comes with a prize,to make someone look like a fool and a nausius creature.You re not much of a man Albert II...nor is your Queen the dolce Paola in this case.They ve both had affairs and yes well,if you burn your behind,you have to sit on the blisters.Chapeau Delphine!

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

me too!
I thought only legitimate children got titles

In modern EU countries the term "legitimate children" does not exist. A child is always legitimate. He or she is always the product of two parents, married or not.


Any son or daughter of a nobleman is "legitimate" for law, irrespective the marital status of the father.


See the case Carlos Klynstra (natural son of The Duke of Parma, whom succesfully made use of his right to be known with his natural father's surname and title and so become HRH Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme).

 

[Countessmeout]

In modern EU countries the term "legitimate children" does not exist. A child is always legitimate. He or she is always the product of two parents, married or not.


Any son or daughter of a nobleman is "legitimate" for law, irrespective the marital status of the father.


See the case Carlos Klynstra (natural son of The Duke of Parma, whom succesfully made use of his right to be known with his natural father's surname and title and so become HRH Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme).

There is a clear distinction still. Name one title where the child born out of wedlock is in line for the throne or in case of nobility, their fathers title? There is none. Because the distinction still exists.

Is prince Carlos (as you seem unable or unwilling to call him) heir to the duchy? If no distinction is made he and not his half brother should be heir to defunct Duke of Parma title. Yet he is not. Because while the courts ruled he was entitled to his father's last name and rank, it didn't make him a member of the royal house. Dutch courts ruled that was a private matter.


That is the big difference here. Delphine hasnt simply been given a title but it's been ruled she has the same rights as her siblings. That is totally different then Prince Carlos who has the name but nothing else.

At least in Carlos case his parents weren't committing adultry.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

In modern EU countries the term "legitimate children" does not exist. A child is always legitimate. He or she is always the product of two parents, married or not.

Any son or daughter of a nobleman is "legitimate" for law, irrespective the marital status of the father.

See the case Carlos Klynstra (natural son of The Duke of Parma, whom succesfully made use of his right to be known with his natural father's surname and title and so become HRH Prince Carlos de Bourbon de Parme).

Dutch law does not apply to other EU countries where "legitimacy" for civil law does not correspond to "legitimacy" for nobiliary law.

Benjamin Lascelles, eldest son of the British Earl of Harewood, is indeed legitimate for modern British law, but he remains legally incapable of inheriting the earldom because of his birth out of wedlock.

In Belgium, the standard remainder for nobiliary titles is inheritance in the legitimate male line only.

https://diplomatie.belgium.be/en/services/Protocol/nobility_and_honorary_distinctions/nobility/faq

There is a clear distinction still. Name one title where the child born out of wedlock is in line for the throne or in case of nobility, their fathers title? There is none. Because the distinction still exists.

Duc_et_Pair was accurate in naming the Dutch nobility, where there is no distinction for titles of nobility due to a legal amendment in 1994.

In the Dutch Royal House, the distinction is between children born from an approved marriage and children not born from an approved marriage.

Is prince Carlos (as you seem unable or unwilling to call him) heir to the duchy? If no distinction is made he and not his half brother should be heir to defunct Duke of Parma title. Yet he is not. Because while the courts ruled he was entitled to his father's last name and rank, it didn't make him a member of the royal house. Dutch courts ruled that was a private matter.

Hugo Klynstra was his name at the time he applied to take his father's title and name.

The ducal title is a pretended one and is not legally recognized as a title of the Dutch nobility. If it were, then I suppose Hugo would be its heir indeed.

The Dutch Royal House continues to distinguish between children born in and out of approved marriages.

That is the big difference here. Delphine hasnt simply been given a title but it's been ruled she has the same rights as her siblings. That is totally different then Prince Carlos who has the name but nothing else.

Delphine asked for the same rights as her siblings, but it is unclear whether the court granted her request. Only the titles and last name were explicitly confirmed by her lawyers.