The British Justice concludes that the emeritus king cannot be tried in the United Kingdom due to Corinna Larsen's lawsuit

The High Court of England and Wales has concluded that the king emeritus, Juan Carlos I, cannot be tried in the United Kingdom for the lawsuit for alleged harassment that Corinna Larsen filed to claim 126 million pounds (about 146 million euros) in compensation. of damages.

“My main conclusion is that the High Court of England and Wales lacks jurisdiction to hear this claim. This is because it has not been brought against the defendant in their country of domicile, as is their default right; and the plaintiff has not convinced me that she has a strong and defensible argument that her claim falls within an exception to that predetermined rule,” Judge Collins Rice said.

In the ruling, the judge has indicated that she is also not convinced that the defendant has submitted, or should be deemed to have submitted, to the jurisdiction of the High Court by his own conduct of this litigation thus far.

The decision was announced this Friday after last July the court heard the arguments of the defense of Juan Carlos I, in charge of the British firm Velitor Law.

Corinna's lawyers explained shortly after the ruling was announced that their client is “disappointed” and willing to study the relevant resources.

The legal team of the emeritus king requested in July that Larsen's lawsuit be dismissed, considering that the courts of the United Kingdom were not competent to hear this lawsuit.. The defense was based on Article 4 of the EU regulation on jurisdiction, which states that people domiciled in a Member State, regardless of their nationality, must be sued before the courts of that country.

The lawyers stated in their brief that the community regulation operated in this specific case because it began before the end of the transition period for Brexit, until December 31, 2020.

Thus, they insisted that the Spanish courts were competent to deal with Larsen's claim.. To this, they added that “the key question” was whether, in relation to the alleged acts of harassment, the United Kingdom was the place where the alleged 'harmful event' or 'direct harm' occurred, something that, as they pointed out, the Larsen's lawyers had not shown.

Corinna's “lack of credibility”

Another of the arguments put forward by the defense was “the obvious lack of credibility of the plaintiff.”. In this regard, they highlighted that Larsen had requested permission to make a new modification to his original complaint.. “Like its predecessors, it is incoherent, internally contradictory and manifestly bad in legal terms,” said the defense of the emeritus king.

At this point, he denied the existence of “a pattern of conduct” of harassment attributable to the former monarch, reproaching Larsen for limiting himself to recounting “several incidents” that, in the defense's opinion, “are highly different in terms of their nature.” , take place sporadically over several years and were carried out by different people (not always the defendant) against various objectives (not always the defendant).

Furthermore, he stressed that Larsen's claims—which Juan Carlos I “emphatically denies”—are not only “false” but also “inconsistent with public statements made by her” before the litigation.

In fact, he recalled that, after the abdication of Juan Carlos I, on June 14, 2014, Larsen “issued a statement of affection” where he described him as “a man of profound humanity and courage, a loyal and always attentive friend.” , as well as a “giant of History”.

On the other hand, the defense expressed its discomfort at the fact that “the accusations involve an alleged abuse of power inconsistent with the defendant's important role in Spain's Transition towards a successful parliamentary democracy, and with his long period of service as sovereign “.

The immunity of Don Juan Carlos

The sources consulted indicated that the objective of that four-day hearing was to address the preliminary issues that remained pending until the scope of the former monarch's immunity was resolved.

It was on December 6 when the Court of Appeal of England and Wales established that Don Juan Carlos enjoys immunity with respect to actions prior to his abdication as King of Spain, in 2014.

This court decision means that Larsen's lawsuit, which places the time frame of the alleged harassment between 2012 and 2020, could only be pursued before the British courts for what happened after 2014.

The businesswoman reported in her lawsuit that Juan Carlos I had harassed her after she ended the relationship they had had.. First to try to get her back and then as revenge to harm her business, according to Larsen.

He demanded compensation from the king emeritus for the costs of his mental health medical treatment, for the “installation of personal security measures and daily protection services” and for the hiring of “former diplomats and former government officials” to intervene with in order to “end the harassment” he says he has received.