Succession Law of Westeros

[Prince Yourwetdream Aeryn]

1. The eldest son/daughter of monarch is appointed as heir with title Prince/Princess of Dragonstone.

1.1. Death of the eldest son/daughter of monarch or unsuitable marriage of that person could result his/her removal from succession in favor of younger son/daughter of monarch if it does not contradict 2nd part of law.

1.2. In times of war or when the eldest daughter of monarch does not put forward her claim then succession passes to next male/female member of the family.

2. The eldest grandson of the eldest son/daughter of monarch  is appointed as heir with title Prince/Princess of Dragonstone if he/she died.

2.1. Descendants born without marriage or in unsuitable marriages are removed from succession.

2.2. Dragonseeds or bastards have no right to succession to Iron Throne even if they are legitimized.

2.3. Removal of the eldest daughter from succession does not mean that her descendants cannot be appointed as heir by the king on Iron Throne.

2.4. Female descendants of the eldest son of monarch could be put aside in succession by decision of the Great Council.

3. If monarch and small council cannot decide the succession or there is no clear will written by monarch then Great Council can be summoned by monarch/regent/small council.

3.1. Underaged candidates could be put aside by decision of the Great Council in times of war.

3.2. Candidates with mental ilness is removed by decision of the Great Council.

 

[Rufus Snow]

To be fair, most of what you have quoted is strictly CUSTOM rather than LAW.

Westeros hasn't had it's 'Magna Carta moment' yet, the Crown is not bound by the law in as much as a king can (and sometimes does) decide to do things his own way irrespective of what the laws or customs dictate. This does not mean it always works out as intended, but stopping the king doing as he pleases usually requires a war rather than a court case.

[Vaith]

52 minutes ago, Rufus Snow said:

To be fair, most of what you have quoted is strictly CUSTOM rather than LAW.

Westeros hasn't had it's 'Magna Carta moment' yet, the Crown is not bound by the law in as much as a king can (and sometimes does) decide to do things his own way irrespective of what the laws or customs dictate. This does not mean it always works out as intended, but stopping the king doing as he pleases usually requires a war rather than a court case.

The Targaryens also seem to have had things a little different from the rest of Westeros. Before the Dance, there was some leeway with the gender laws that tended to fall in favour of the woman's side of things; for example, Alysanne wanting to consider Daenerys her heir after Aemon was born, and Aerea's claim not being disregarded -- indeed, Maegor had to be chronicled as a legitimate king so Jaehaerys did not come across as usurping Aerea's claim.

Post-Dance, they seem to be semi-Salic unlike the rest of Westeros, with female heirs only being considered if there are no males, per a SSM someplace, I believe. For example, the young child Cerelle Lannister was able to inherit Casterly Rock ahead of her uncle Gerold until her untimely death; In the same situation in House Targaryen I do not think she would be considered in the post-Dance Iron Throne. 

2 hours ago, Prince Yourwetdream Aeryn said:

2.2. Dragonseeds or bastards have no right to succession to Iron Throne even if they are legitimized.

Really? Because there were about five wars on whether Daeron II or Daemon Blackfyre should succeed Aegon IV after he legitimised all his bastards; even with Daeron II being older than Daemon. The claim was tenuous, but the fact that so many lords rose makes me cast doubt on this being some set-in-stone rule.

[Eltharion21]

2 hours ago, Vaith said:

Really? Because there were about five wars on whether Daeron II or Daemon Blackfyre should succeed Aegon IV after he legitimised all his bastards; even with Daeron II being older than Daemon. The claim was tenuous, but the fact that so many lords rose makes me cast doubt on this being some set-in-stone rule.

It is possibly because Daeron II was rumored to be bastard son of Aemon the Dragonknight , so when two bastards are main candidates than it makes it alright by the lords I guess ?

[Vaith]

7 minutes ago, Eltharion21 said:

It is possibly because Daeron II was rumored to be bastard son of Aemon the Dragonknight , so when two bastards are main candidates than it makes it alright by the lords I guess ?

Even so, it kind of discounts OP's claim that legitimised bastards are not eligible in succession.

I just have a lot of doubt the claim is even valid, too. Naerys seems like a female Baelor in respect to piety, wanted to be a septa and asked for the marriage to end after Daeron II was born, and yet one is supposed to believe she was having an affair?

[Endymion I Targaryen]

Aelora Targaryen became heir of Aerys I instead of Maekar after Aelor's death so there is no strict succession law.

Considering legitimised bastards there many lords who believed Daemon Blackfyre was the rightful heir.

Despite the recent "iron precedent" of 101 that the Iron Throne could not pass to a woman, or to a male descendant of a woman, Viserys I named Rhaenyra his heir and did not change that despite producing sons. 

Succesion in Westeros has not to do with law 100% but depends on the situation and the power of the claimants to outdo their rivals.

[867-5309]

7 hours ago, Rufus Snow said:

To be fair, most of what you have quoted is strictly CUSTOM rather than LAW.

Westeros hasn't had it's 'Magna Carta moment' yet, the Crown is not bound by the law in as much as a king can (and sometimes does) decide to do things his own way irrespective of what the laws or customs dictate. This does not mean it always works out as intended, but stopping the king doing as he pleases usually requires a war rather than a court case.

This is true.