# UK Dopers: Are civil weddings really public? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 21, 2005, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248 "2005-02-21T22:34:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248/1 "2005-02-21T22:34:04Z")
Are civil weddings in the United Kingdom really open to the public? I ask because appartly people are saying the Charles/Camilla wedding must be open to the general public. Now, I have no interest in flying to England, but why are they suppoded to be public? Aren’t marriage notices published in the newpapers? And what if there isn’t enough space for the invited guests _and_ general public members? Do guests have to leave to make room? ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248/2 "2005-02-21T22:45:48Z")
I’m not great royal watcher, but AFAIK the objection to the heir having a civil marriage is that it is _not_ public, at least not in the way an Anglican marriage is. Technically, you could have a civil marriage without anybody outside of the ceremony knowing. This would not be possible in the Church of England - of which Charles will one day be head. ---
**Author:** ![ticker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d07c76/32.png) [@ticker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ticker)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2005, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248/3 "2005-02-21T23:57:48Z")
I thought the problem was that Windsor Castle would need to be licensed if the wedding was to be held there. If it was licensed then any low-born common oik could get married there. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248/4 "2005-02-22T00:26:48Z")
As [reported](http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1419100,00.html), the problem is that: > [@](#): > > Dr Stephen Cretney, an emeritus fellow of All Souls’ College, Oxford, said the Marriage (Approved Premises) Regulations, which opened the way for civil marriages to be held in places other than register offices, made it plain that the public had to be admitted. > > The rules say: “Public access to any ceremony of marriage solemnised in approved premises must be permitted without charge.” > > Dr Cretney, author of Family Law in 20th century Britain: a History, had earlier pointed out that Prince Charles and Mrs Parker-Bowles could not marry in Windsor castle without opening it as a venue for other civil marriages. The relevant bit of Statuatory Instrument 1995, No. 510, The Marriages (Approved Premises) Regulations 1995 can be found [here](http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si1995/Uksi_19950510_en_3.htm). A [typical interpretation by a local authority](http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/a2zforms.nsf/6d9045646641e64580256d9b0037c64b/9a87f54db248cf7d80256e67002a526d/%24FILE/Marriage%20Premises%20Licence%20Notes.pdf). I’m expecting that invited guests being admitted first and then a small section section roped off for members of the public, on a first-come-first-admitted basis with security checks, will satisfy the letter of the law. The legislation can hardly be interpreted as requiring that the hosts accommodate an unlimited number of people who happen to decide to turn up. As to why this is the rule, it’s presumably to ensure that, sitcom-style, anyone with good reason can supposedly turn up and object at the crucial moment. ---
**Author:** ![owlstretchingtime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/958977/32.png) [@owlstretchingtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/owlstretchingtime)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248/5 "2005-02-22T11:16:27Z")
> [@bonzer](#): > > As to why this is the rule, it’s presumably to ensure that, sitcom-style, anyone with good reason can supposedly turn up and object at the crucial moment. And this is where it gets interesting… It turns out that Royal marriages are sopecifically excluded from the Civil Marriages Act - so the marriage would be illegal - so if anyone objected they would have to stop. They’ll probably have to go to Scotland. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248/6 "2005-02-22T11:31:22Z")
Even if the premises are accessible to the public, such access could probably be overridden by other regulations - such as making sure that the building is populated to the maximum extent permitted by the fire & safety regulations; “Sorry sir, we can’t let you in for safety reasons”. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-dopers-are-civil-weddings-really-public/291248/7 "2005-02-22T22:06:34Z")
Well apparnetly they’ll be [one less guest](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4289225.stm). Their wedding is turning into a farce. First they change venue, then it turns out they might have to let people in off the street. And the mother of the groom overides the grooms plans then refuses to atten the actual wedding. It’s like a really expensive sitcom. Or should I say britcom.