A COURT case with staggering implications for the global aristocracy is expected to conclude next month.

Two Englishmen, Simon Robert Pringle and his second cousin Norman Murray Pringle, want to inherit the baronetcy of Stichill, a Scottish village.

Simon Robert is the son of the 10th Baronet, Sir Steuart Robert Pringle, the former Commandant General of the Royal Marines who died in 2013.

Norman Murray Pringle, 74, an accountant from High Wycombe, said that DNA evidence innocently provided by the late Sir Steuart for a family tree project proves that his father, the 9th baronet, Norman Hamilton Pringle, was not the legitimate son of the 8th baronet.

In other words, Florence Madge Pringle, wife of the 8th baronet, was not exactly telling the truth when she declared that Norman Hamilton Pringle was the son of her husband.

As no illegitimate son can take up a baronetcy, Norman Murray Pringle said that his father, the second son of the 8th baronet should have become the 9th baronet and the title should now pass to him.

To do so, he has effectively had to accuse his granny of adultery.

STICHILL?

It’s a small and pretty village in the Scottish Borders, a couple of miles from Kelso and a little bit more than five miles from the border with England.

The village has long been associated with the Pringle family, whose history as Border Reivers was long and notorious, at least until the 1590s when they joined with other border lairds to keep the peace under King James VI.

It was another Stuart King, Charles II, who made Robert Pringle the first Baronet of Stichill in 1683. The family have given distinguished service in such areas as the law and the armed forces ever since.

WHY SUCH A CASE?

A baronetcy is in the gift of the Crown, and while the eldest male child born in wedlock is presumed to be the heir, there is no automatic entitlement to inherit as is the case with peerages.

Basically, you have to claim the inheritance and have your name entered on the Roll of Baronetage. Then, and only then, can you start calling yourself Baronet of wherever.

After Sir Steuart died, both Simon and Norman Pringle registered their claims to the Baronetcy of Stichill in June and September of 2013 respectively.

In November of the following year the Queen referred the case to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council under section four of the Judicial Committee Act 1833 so as to obtain the opinion of the committee as to which of the two claimants should have their name entered on the Official Roll of the Baronetage in respect of the Baronetcy of Stichill.

So WHO ARE THE JUDGES?

The judicial committee of the Privy Council usually contents itself by being the very serious Supreme Court or Court of Appeal for former British territories such as Jamaica, the Bahamas and New Zealand, but when the Queen asks them to decide issues such as entitlement to a baronetcy, they don’t say no.

The seven judges, all of them members of the UK Supreme Court, heard the evidence last week and will now decide the case. They are Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Hughes, Lord Reed, and Lord Hodge – none of them hereditary peers, it should be said, while the last two are Scottish judges of some renown.

SO WHO CARES ABOUT ARISTOS ANYWAY?

Baronets are not actually classed as aristocrats, but in a British state that still has hereditary peers in parliament, some people take their titles very seriously indeed.

The Stichill case involves no land or property or inherited wealth, just a title and the right for the successful claimant to call himself ‘Sir,’ while his wife can be addressed as Lady, if she so wishes.

WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS?

If Norman Pringle wins his case, it will surely only be a matter of time before peerages are also challenged – maybe even monarchies.

There is a presumption in law that a child born to a woman married to a man is the child of that husband, but if DNA evidence is allowed to override that presumption, it could set a precedent for future claims to titles. The case of the Stichill Claimant will then be cited as evidence that DNA should prove your right to inherit.

Given the bed-hopping antics of royals, lords and ladies over the centuries, there could be a serious re-writing of history, not just in Britain but in any country with hereditary titles – that’s a fair amount of Europe for a start. Some estimates say there are 7,000 families with hereditary titles around the world.

Our own royal family have been dogged for centuries by unpleasant rumours about the parentage of various members. At the very least, DNA evidence would scotch those rumours. Wouldn’t it?