| ▲ | philipwhiuk a year ago | |||||||
The City of London isn't legally reliant on a charter. It draws existence from 'Time Immemorial'. Specifically it exists because it existed before 1189  | ||||||||
| ▲ | zzbn00 a year ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
This is a good and subtle point of law -- The City of London is a corporation "by prescription". But while it was created by neither statue nor royal charter, I doubt the parliament could not end it if it so decided....  | ||||||||
  | ||||||||
| ▲ | bradleyjg a year ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
The King-in-Parliament can abrogate common law.  | ||||||||