Latest Posts

Miley Cyrus is giving Lidl a big boost in flower sales thanks to the new super hit single

Miley Cyrus' new song Flowers has seen a huge...

Who is Rory McIlroy’s caddy? Everything we know about Harry Diamond

With Rory McIlory heading for another Major at the...

Elvira Navarro: “We are the heritage, even though it is dressed in other clothes”

Adriana feels she is too old to take on...

The Honorable King justifies his immunity from British justice because the CNI was upholding “sovereign acts”.

- Advertisement -

The King’s emeritus attorneys defended this Tuesday, at a hearing in the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, that if Corina Larsen puts the CNI in harassment, which she says she suffered from Juan Carlos I, the fact that the services report. The intrusion of secrecy implies that these were “sovereign acts” that would be protected by immunity, Europa Press reports.

This was expressed by one of the lawyers of Juan Carlos I in a long statement of about two and a half hours, in which he used the “specific allegations” mentioned by Larsen in his lawsuit before the British courts, which describes two specific passages: visited that the then head of the CNI, Félix Sanz Roldán, would pay him in London and a search by CNI agents of his home in Monaco.

If, according to Larsen’s version, the CNI harassed him in a “covert mission” orchestrated by Sant Roldan, allegedly at the behest of the then king, it would be a “classic” case of “sovereign acts” being protected, the lawyer argues. according to immunity.

And this despite the fact that the mentioned actions may imply “abuse of power” by the state agents participating in them, the lawyer of the former head of state emphasized and cited abundant jurisprudence in this regard.

Larsen’s legal representative, for his part, stressed in a roughly 45-minute intervention that was interrupted by an hour-long break that the former monarch would be protected by immunity only if he said the actions were “official. ” the interest of the Spanish state, although in this case he claimed that it would be only a personal interest, for his own benefit.

before resigning

The purpose of the hearing is for the parties to present their arguments regarding Judge Matthew Nicklin’s March 24 decision denying King Emeritus immunity.

On July 18, the British magistrates allowed the lawyers of Juan Carlos I to appeal Nicklin’s decision, but they already clarified that only in relation to the events that took place between 2012 and 2014, when he was still the head of state, because they understood that the events that would take place after the abdication Then, the British judge was right to discount immunity.

The businessman dates the alleged harassment from 2012 to 2020. According to the lawsuit, Juan Carlos I abused her after ending their relationship. First to try to get him back and then in revenge to hurt his business.

Source: El Diario

Latest

Stay in touch:

255,324FansLike
128,657FollowersFollow
97,058SubscribersSubscribe

Don't miss

Miley Cyrus is giving Lidl a big boost in flower sales thanks to the new super hit single

Miley Cyrus' new song Flowers has seen a huge increase in plant sales at Lidl since it was released on 12 January. The break-up...

Who is Rory McIlroy’s caddy? Everything we know about Harry Diamond

With Rory McIlory heading for another Major at the PGA Championship this week, we thought we'd take a look at Rory's right-hand man, caddy...

Elvira Navarro: “We are the heritage, even though it is dressed in other clothes”

Adriana feels she is too old to take on the adjective 'orphan' when her mother dies. He's in his early thirties and thinks...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here