Aristocrats’ fear as judges rule DNA tests can be used to rumble fake heirs
Landmark ruling strips would-be Baronet of right to title
SOME of Britain’s richest toffs could lose their posh titles after top judges yesterday ruled DNA evidence CAN be used to prove who is a rightful heir.
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council’s landmark ruling stripped aristo Simon Pringle of his right to become a Scottish Baronet after tests showed his grandfather was illegitimate.
They said the title should pass to his cousin Murray Pringle — a retired accountant who lives in High Wycombe, Bucks.
But the ruling will leave some of aristos with murky family pasts shaking over their financial futures.
And it opens the floodgates for a string of claims to some of Britain’s most famous family seats if toffs have played away.
Yesterday’s judgement rejected the current heir to the Baronetcy of Stichill’s claim that using DNA evidence would breach confidentiality and data protection laws.
The ruling is the first time DNA has ever been used to solve legal disputes over hereditary titles.
The southern Scottish baronetcy, first created by Charles II in 1683, was inherited by the ninth Baronet in 1920.
It is not a peerage and heirs have to prove their relationship to the previous baronet before they can take on the title.
The ninth Baronet took over the title in 1961 and Simon Pringle was set to inherit it in 2013.
But Murray Pringle launched his own claim for the seat instead, claiming the ninth baronet was a “cuckoo in the nest”.
He said his own grandfather — the ninth baronet’s younger brother — should have taken the title instead.
Mr Pringle had persuaded the last Baronet to give a DNA sample for a family genealogy project and discovered it showed “very strong support” for his own case.
Today the JCPC panel, made up of seven Supreme Court justices, backed Mr Pringle and said he was “entitled to succeed” and become the 11th Baronet.
RELATED STORIES
Lord Hodge ruled: “In the past, when many landed estates were entailed, there was a strong policy of ensuring social stability by keeping together titles of honour and land.
“Similarly, there was an anxiety to protect the reputation of noble families.
“Challenges to a person’s right to inherit were decided on the evidence, but a heavy onus lay on the challenger.
“Long delays would further increase the onus owing to evidential difficulties.
“However, developments in science mean that evidence can now be used to establish paternity to a high degree of probability.
“Such evidence, if admissible, can readily rebut evidential presumptions and DNA evidence in particular is widely accepted as a reliable means of ascertaining a person’s identity in civil and criminal matters.”
