The emeritus king and Corinna Larsen, in a file image. /
The London Court of Appeal confirms Juan Carlos’s immunity from much of the lawsuit
King Emeritus Juan Carlos will not have to respond to Corinna Larsen’s accusations before the British courts for the period before her abdication, after the Court of Appeal has confirmed that she benefits from the sovereign immunity that international conventions give to heads of states. Larsen will have to decide if she pursues her claim for harassment and subsequent damages.
It is possible that the sentence announced this Tuesday puts an end to the preliminary phase of the judicial procedure, which until now has studied the issue of immunity. A judge of the High Court of England and Wales decided in March that Juan Carlos was not protected by the British State Immunity law, which translates international conventions. He also denied her the right to appeal.
The emeritus king changed lawyers and the new ones convinced the Court of Appeal to hear his case. The court now annuls the competence of the British courts to decide on acts denounced by Larsen, which allegedly occurred before June 2014, such as the harassment of the former director of the National Intelligence Center, Félix Sanz Roldán, or the intrusion of Spanish Government contractors in their homes in Monaco and Switzerland.
The last decision of the judges would open the door for the remaining substance of the lawsuit to be analyzed. Corinna Larsen, who would have maintained a sentimental relationship with the Spanish king and would have received 65 million euros from him that she does not want to return, requests a restraining order against the emeritus and financial compensation for damage to her health and her reputation.
Theft and compensation
In the narrative of facts that supports his claim in the British courts, Larsen describes a very strained relationship with the king emeritus after his abdication. He demands the return of the money that, according to her, he would have donated to her. The couple have meetings in London in which the former Spanish monarch threatens them with possible serious consequences.
Larsen affirms that Juan Carlos would have had conversations with mutual friends in which he spoke ill of her. Her comments, accusing her of having stolen her money, hurt him professionally, losing consulting contracts. People who looked like Spanish security agents followed her in London to scare her. She would have received threatening phone calls.
The Danish businesswoman will have to demonstrate in the hearings of a future trial that the acts she denounces fit into the Law of Protection against Harassment of England and Wales, so that the court issues a restraining order against the emeritus. She will also have to show that she suffered mental health damages from her and economic damages derived from the emeritus’ conversations with others that justify the payment of compensation.