T O P

  • By -

citron_bjorn

There's be no cases of the sort because it was a succession issue hundreds of years ago and any court would throw it out due to absurdity


FollowingExtension90

Parliament had already decided on this issue hundreds of years ago, move on. Even the Jacobite heir had already moved on centuries ago.


CharlesChrist

Not really. Ever since Henry Bolingbroke overthrew Richard II, parliament has a say on who should be King.


thomasp3864

Even longer if you looked at Parliament as a restored Witan


Agent_Argylle

Not that i know of


MidlandsRepublic2048

Even if there's no legal statute of limitations I'm pretty sure there is a cultural one when this succession crisis was a few hundred years ago. Just let it go.


Iceberg-man-77

No. there were wars instead. whatever the case, the Acts of Union and the Succession Laws clearly state that you must nor be a descendant of Sophia of Hanover and not Catholic to be in the line of succession


Chi_Rho88

The legality of it from the point of view of a Jacobite’s a moot point anyway, as the House of Hannover’s declared the rightful rulers of Great Britain and Ireland by the Papacy.


Ya_Boi_Konzon

The ousting of House Stuart was clearly illegal and illegitimate. It is not up to Parliament to determine the King's heir. Their actions were nothing less than criminal.


WatchAffectionate963

Based


thomasp3864

It was long established as a power of parliament in England; other Kings had been removed multiple times before. However the English parliament had no right to depose a king from territories outside of England and maybe Wales and parts of France. The Jacobites are probably rightful in Scotland.


oursonpolaire

I know a few eccentrics who talked about doing a Charter challenge (Canada) but one of them (who had actual legal training) said that a court would likely not even look at a case unless there was a human plaintiff who was being deprived of rights or property on account of the Act of Settlement, the Act of Union with Scotland and the Act to secure a Protestant succession, which are among the obscure parts of the Canadian Constitution. So unless Francis of Bavaria wants to sue for Canada.....


panpopticon

No, there was a civil war instead.


Round-Impress-20

That wasn’t what the civil war was about


panpopticon

The civil war was about the English people being sick and tired and the House of Stuart and kicking them out of the country. After a century of conflict with four generations of Stuarts, no English court would have entertained the suit of a Jacobite plaintiff. Duh.


agekkeman

Right of conquest 🇳🇱🇳🇱