He authorised one of his most senior officials to go public to deny that legislation would be required to prevent Mrs Parker Bowles becoming Queen when the Prince succeeds to the throne.

Paddy Harverson, the Clarence House communications secretary, said: “Mrs Parker Bowles’s wishes have been made clear from the start that she does not wish to take the title of Queen and the Prince is in full agreement.

“The implication of some of today’s media reporting is that Mrs Parker Bowles would have to be called Queen unless there is legislation. This is incorrect and not in accordance with the Government’s advice.” Mrs Parker Bowles will take the title Duchess of Cornwall on April 8 and Princess Consort on succession.

Mr Harverson added: “Mrs Parker Bowles can, as she wishes, be referred to as Princess Consort, rather than Queen, without legislation. Legislation would only be required if it was deemed necessary to confirm formally that she should not have the title and status of Queen.”

The remarks will put Clarence House in direct confrontation with the Department for Constitutional Affairs, headed by the Lord Chancellor, the head of the judiciary, which stated on Monday that an Act of Parliament was required to stop Mrs Parker Bowles automatically becoming Queen on the succession. A spokesman for the department said: “We have nothing further to add.”

In another day of confusion, it emerged that Mrs Parker Bowles, according to constitutionalists, would also be entitled to call herself the Princess of Wales after her marriage on April 8.

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan, editor of Cracroft’s Peerage, said: “Under English common law, Camilla Parker Bowles will become the Princess of Wales on April 8.

“While there is nothing to stop her choosing to be known as the Duchess of Cornwall, the fact is she will be the Princess of Wales. There has never been a Prince of Wales who has not been married to the Princess of Wales.”

Clarence House was accused by a leading constitutional lawyer of covering up the fact that Mrs Parker Bowles will automatically be Queen unless an Act of Parliament is passed.

Stephen Cretney, Emeritus Fellow of All Souls, Oxford, said on the Today programme: “I think there has been, shall we say, a certain lack of candour from the outset. One may regret and wonder why it was not revealed at the outset.”

He said that Clarence House was right to state that Mrs Parker Bowles could adopt the title Duchess of Cornwall after the marriage and Princess Consort on succession to the throne. But he said that it had been wrong not to refer to the legal status of Mrs Parker Bowles as a future Queen.

Dr Cretney predicted that no government would move to strip Mrs Parker Bowles of the right to be Queen. “It is very difficult to envisage any parliament at any time depriving someone who has been performing public services for several years of the right that would normally belong to her of becoming the Queen of England,” he said.

Christopher Leslie, the Constitutional Affairs Minister, said last night that the Government was not planning to amend the law to clarify Mrs Parker Bowles’s position. In response to a written question from Andrew Mackinlay, the Labour MP, asking whether he would bring forward proposals to amend Section 2 of the 1937 Regency Act “to clarify the application of the Act to the future HRH Duchess of Cornwall,” Mr Leslie replied: “No.”

The Prince of Wales wants his future wife to become Queen. But Clarence House rejected any idea that she would ever take the title Princess of Wales.

Mr Mackinley denounced yesterday’s intervention by Clarence House as “wrong and arrogant”. He added: “We are being asked to accept that the law is what they say it is. They have missed the point. This is not a matter for them, it is a matter for Parliament.”

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Computer warriors pay for far-away mercenaries
• Divorce rate falls to 26-year low
• Boris adviser says Olympians tainted with blood