THE Queen has weighed into a Sussex man's legal battle over the right to a Scottish title.

Simon Pringle, 56, who lives near Hastings, and accountant Murray Pringle, 74, of High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, both lay claim to the baronetcy of Pringle of Stichill.

The Queen has asked senior judges to make decisions on the dispute under a piece of legislation dating back more than 150 years.

Seven judges have analysed evidence and legal arguments at a two-day hearing of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London - in one of the most unusual disputes seen in a British court.

The judges, who are all Supreme Court justices, are due to return to court in January to analyse further legal arguments.

They are not expected to publish a ruling for some months.

Judges have been told that Charles II granted the baronetcy of Stichill, a village near Kelso, Roxburghshire, to Robert Pringle of Stichill - and the ''male heirs from his body'' - on January 5 1683.

The 10th Baronet, Sir Steuart Pringle - a retired Royal Marine commander who survived an IRA bomb attack - died in 2013 aged 84.

Now his son Simon, and Murray - Simon's second cousin - disagree over who should claim the title.

Lawyers for Murray Pringle said Simon should not become the 11th Baronet because there has been a ''break in the line of paternity''.

They say tests have shown that Sir Steuart's DNA ''did not match that of the Pringle lineage''.

Simon today said his father and mother - Lady Jacqueline Pringle, who died in 2012 - had hoped that the dispute would have been solved in their lifetimes.

Lawyers for Murray Pringle have suggested the problem arose following the death of the 8th Baronet, Sir Norman Pringle, in 1919.

They said Sir Norman and his wife Florence had three sons: Norman, Ronald - Murray's father - and James.

In 1920 Florence had made a formal 'Statutory Declaration saying Norman was the eldest son of the 8th Baronet and was entitled to succeed to the baronetcy.

But Murray is arguing that the 8th Baronet was not Norman's father and he claims that, as Ronald's son, he is the rightful successor to the baronetcy.

Lawyers for Simon Pringle are disputing Murray Pringle's claim to the title.

Simon explained how his father had agreed to give a DNA sample to Murray for a "genealogy project".

Murray had then, in 2010, told Sir Steuart he should "rightfully" be the baronet, said Simon.

He added: "My father agreed to give a sample of his DNA out of kindness to a person he did not know to support what was presented as an innocent genealogy project. Such kindness was typical of him."