Talk:Johann Leopold, Hereditary Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

Hello User:BlueMoonlet I disagree with your edits on articles about the Dukes of Albany. The legislation is very clear. People who needed permission for their marriages under the Royal Marriages Act 1772 and not obtain them have conducted marriages that can have no consequences under British Law. This has recently been discussed again on this talk page. I'm going to revert your edits for now, awaiting a secondary source that indeed explicitly puts the question in doubt. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 01:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

The matter was furthermore clearly demonstrated when the 2nd Duke of Cambridge conducted a legal marriage in contravention of the Royal Marriages act 1772. His sons were not only excluded from the succession to the throne but were also not eligible to inherit his peerages. In other places on wikipedia this is mentioned here and here.Gerard von Hebel (talk) 01:34, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Conversation continues here. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 17:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've read the continuing conversation, and I don't see that a consensus was reached. Absent somebody locating a British government document or other reliable source that says "The Albany claims are extinct," the assertion that "the right to petition for the return of the title became extinct" is OR. No matter how clear the legislation appears to be, your reading or my reading of that legislation is still OR. I do think it is likely that the Albany claims are extinct, but that's only my opinion, and I can find no source that explicitly makes that claim. If nobody else finds such a source, I am going to reword the relevant statement to "the right to petition for the return may no longer exist." Biblioteqa (talk) 21:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

The Royal Marriages Act has been repealed, so most marriages without consent under the Act are not now void. See Succession to the Crown Act 2013#Sovereign's consent to royal marriages. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Until there are official rulings, such as by a court, on the meaning of the predicate conditions (especially "it was reasonable for the person concerned not to have been aware at the time of the marriage that the act applied"), I don't think we can say one way or another whether any particular marriage would be considered not void. It's all up-in-the-air, so I agree with your decision to just eliminate the whole sentence. Biblioteqa (talk) 23:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Johann Leopold, Hereditary Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080315223745/http://www.angelfire.com/realm/gotha/gotha/saxony.html to http://www.angelfire.com/realm/gotha/gotha/saxony.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 23 April 2017 (UTC)Reply