British justice allows the emeritus to appeal the decision that denied him immunity from Corinna’s lawsuit

Juan Carlos I’s lawyers allege that he is protected for being one of the six members of the Spanish Royal House


The United Kingdom Court of Appeals has decided this Monday to allow the emeritus king to appeal Judge Matthew Nicklin’s initial decision not to recognize any immunity against the lawsuit filed by his former close friend Corinna Larsen for harassment, which would allow Juan Carlos I curb the civil actions undertaken by the businesswoman.

This was announced by Judge Nicholas Underhill at the end of a hearing that lasted about two hours and where the former monarch’s lawyers have argued that, despite his abdication in 2014, Juan Carlos I is a member of the Royal House and, as As such, he maintains a special relationship with Felipe VI, which means that any action taken against him affects the functions of the current head of state.

The lawyer has focused his argument on the fact that, according to Spanish law, Juan Carlos I is no longer head of state but is one of the six people who make up the Royal House, along with queens Letizia and Sofía and the princesses Leonor and Sofia.

“The term Casa Real is a concept, not a place”, he has limited, to explain that the fundamental thing is the “close relations in special circumstances” between its members, not the fact that they live together under the same roof.

In this sense, he has cited a case relating to the Saudi monarchy where immunity was granted to members of its royal house “to protect the functions of the head of state”.

“It is the recognition that whatever happens to those other five people inescapably impacts the (current) sovereign itself,” the lawyer concluded.

Under this premise, it has claimed that it has “an arguable case” that justifies the appeal that they want to raise, admitting that, although it may require further elaboration, it is at least “a promising start.”

Judge Underhill, although he has described as “surprising” the argument that anything that affects Juan Carlos I “necessarily” impacts Felipe VI, has appreciated sufficient reasons to give the green light to the presentation of the appeal.


At the other extreme, Larsen’s lawyer has insisted that no immunity can be granted to the king emeritus for the acts of which the businesswoman accuses him for understanding that they were “private acts”.

Here the British judge has once again shown his skepticism because, he has reasoned, if Larsen maintains that she was harassed through the former head of the CNI Félix Sanz Roldán, no individual in a private capacity could have promoted such harassment by Spanish Intelligence.

The lawyer has replied that the personal immunity of the former head of state disappeared with the abdication and that, in this case, Sanz Roldán could have acted as a “friend” of Don Juan Carlos.

“That does not mean that the Spanish State was involved,” he asserted, to add that this would be as much as saying any act issued by the King Emeritus is an “act of State.” “But that is not correct,” she has settled.


In this way, the Court of Appeals has authorized to challenge the decision adopted on March 24 by Judge Nicklin, a magistrate of the Superior Court of Justice who determined that Don Juan Carlos did not enjoy the immunity conferred on him by the Head of State for have abdicated. “There is only one King and one head of state in Spain and, since June 19, 2014, that is his son, King Felipe VI,” he ruled.

With this resolution, Judge Nicklin cleared the way for Larsen’s lawsuit to continue its course in British justice, something that will now depend on how the appeal is resolved, once the appeal has been formulated by the former monarch’s lawyers.

The businesswoman recounts in her lawsuit that Juan Carlos I would have harassed her after she put an end to the relationship they had maintained. First to try to get it back from her and then as a revenge to hurt her in her business, according to Larsen’s story.

For this reason, he claims compensation from the king emeritus – the amount of which has not transpired – 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 in order to “end the harassment” he says he has received.

Related articles

They follow Messi: FIFA also packs his suitcases and disembarks in Miami

Since Lionel Messi moved all his talent to Miami, the eyes of the world are on what is happening with Inter Miami. Following...

The tantalizing scent of rain or freshly baked bread: why can certain smells transport...

My father was a carpenter, meaning I have spent a great deal of my life surrounded by wood, saws, plans...