Prince Philip’s wish, Died in April this year, Which became a legal battle in the UK as it restricted the influx of newspapers during the trial a few months ago.
The British newspaper The Guardian has filed a lawsuit against Queen Elizabeth II’s attorney general and private lawyers, arguing that the High Court’s decision to ban the press violates the “principle of transparent justice” and should be reconsidered.
In September, the head of the family section of the British High Court ruled that the will of Prince Philip should not be accessible to the public for 90 years. According to the newspaper, the investigation was carried out in secret without informing the media and allowing them to attend.
Only representatives of the Queen and Prince Philip, with Attorney General Michael Ellis, were allowed to appear. “Both sides were able to persuade the judge to exclude the media from the trial,” the newspaper wrote.
The judge’s argument is that the Attorney General will already be there to represent the public interest, which The Guardian does not accept.
Under British law, if a person dies, his will is automatically made public. This is done to ensure that the will is executed, to bring it to the attention of potential beneficiaries, and to prevent fraud against a person’s property.
However, the royal family is exempt from this. The will of the king is obscured by law, however, and this is not the law from other members of the royal family. However, the royal family continues to seek this evidence in court.
The first to use the resource were the Queen Mother, Mary, the wife of King George V and the mother of Elizabeth II. She may have secretly listened to the wishes of her brother, Prince Francis of Tech, who left jewelry for a woman who was supposed to be the mistress.
Queen Mary’s own will was already subject to demands for release, as well as the wishes of Elizabeth II’s sister, Princess Margaret.
“Internet addiction in terminals. Award-winning beer expert. Travel expert. General analyst.”