King Juan Carlos asks for permission in London to appeal the rejection of his immunity to Corinna

British defense lawyers John Charles I in London have raised the application for mandatory permission to decide whether they can appeal to the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, of England and Wales to defend the sovereign immunity of your client. The petition has been registered, as confirmed by EL PERIÓDICO in documents registered with the aforementioned court. The registry gives the date of the request as the 25th and 26th of last May, as soon as the King Emeritus returned to his place of residence in Abu Dhabi after his four-day visit, between Thursday May 19 and Monday May 23, to Sanxenxo and Madrid.

The defense of Juan Carlos I has already lost the battle of immunity before the demand of his ex-lover, Corinna zu Sayn-Wittgensteinfor alleged acts of harassment, illegal monitoring of agents of the National Intelligence Center (CNI) in Monaco and London, and defamation, on March 24. That day the judge Matthew Nicklin, in charge of the media section of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, issued a ruling that dismissed all the arguments of the defense on the emeritus’s State immunity in his capacity as former king and former head of state of Spain. Five days later, the defense appealed appeal or replacement before the judge himself, who denied the permit and suggested to the defense that, in any case, he will raise his appeal before the Court of Appeals.

The judge insisted that this resource should not delay the start of the investigation of the claim. The loss of that legal battle led to an agreement to deposit in the month of May a precautionary payment of 230,000 pounds sterling (€271,000) by Juan Carlos I, whose defense announced that he would attend the Court of Appeals.

permission to appeal

In his request, the defense of the emeritus king now requests “permission to appeal and requests the stay of execution and permission to be able to count on new tests & rdquor ;.

At the same time, the defense indicates that the current situation is that it is “waiting for pieces and/or documents of the lawyers of the plaintiff & rdquor ;.

The defense sent, on May 25, a letter to the lawyers of Corinna zu Sayn-Wittgenstein in which they requested those parts and documents. And on the 26th, he raised the file of the procedure to the department of management and judicial control of the litigation.

This system, called ‘case management’, makes the court the promoter of an effective and efficient treatment of each case. The court sets the pace of litigation, regardless of the parties, to ensure a fair, proportional and timely treatment of the cases.

For their part, the plaintiff’s lawyers have modified, along the lines described in the hearings and in the sentence by Judge Nicklin, their claim (‘particulars of claim’).

State harassment?

In the sentence of March 24, the judge indicated, in point 74, in relation to the acts that General Felix Saint Roldanformer director of the CNI, that the “alleged threats of harassment by phone or ‘e-mail’ by a high official state position does not simply make them acts of state”. Therefore, the judge states: “For the benefit of clarity in the future conduct of the lawsuit, I consider that the plaintiff, as her lawyer has offered james lewismakes it clear in his writing that the accusations against General Sanz Roldán are his acts in a personal capacity, not as head of the CNI or any other official function & rdquor ;.

And in its conclusion, according to which the lawsuit continues, by rejecting the summon immunity of Juan Carlos I, Judge Nicklin “requires amending the application brief to make it clear that the acts imputed to General Sanz Roldán have been carried out by him personally”.

Although the new letter has not transpired, legal sources in London indicate that the lawyers of the firm Kobre & Kim have incorporated Judge Nicklin’s suggestions on the personal conduct of acts of harassment that impute General Sanz Roldán.

The reality of Juan Carlos I’s visit to Sanxenxo and Madrid has given reason to the arguments of Corinna’s lawyers -assumed by Judge Nicklin in his sentence- on the fact that the king emeritus, being a member of the royal family is not part of the House of His Majesty King Felipe VI (Royal Household).

The defense of the emeritus played the trick of mixing both circumstances, but the circumstance that Juan Carlos I could not spend a single night in the Zarzuela Palace during his visit he has confirmed, in retrospect, what Judge Nicklin had already warned.

No comment

Sources of the plaintiff consulted by EL PERIÓDICO refused this Thursday, June 2, to rule on whether the new letter reflects the circumstances of the visit of the emeritus’s first visit to Spain since his self-banishment in United Arab Emirates as of August 3, 2020.

“Sorry, but in the United Kingdom We cannot comment on the progress while a case is being substantiated & rdquor ;, said the source consulted.

The judicial battle therefore shifts to the Court of Appeals, Civil Division. At the moment, there is no brief from the defense of Juan Carlos I on the appeal, nor a judge or judges (there may be two) assigned to the case, pending the pieces and documents that the lawyers of the emeritus have requested from the plaintiffs.

Related news

Once all the material has been presented, the judges will have to decide if the defense of Juan Carlos I really presents an authentic point of law to be clarified or is it limited to buying time as Judge Nicklin warned, who urged the defense to keep him informed about the ups and downs of his appeal before the Court of Appealsamong them, what time is calculated for a resolution.

Neither in Switzerland nor in Spain did the proceedings finally archived go through the courts. And despite the circumstance that in the United Kingdom -since it is the place where the acts of alleged harassment have occurred- it is a civil lawsuitthis does not diminish the importance of the fact that, yes, the epicenter of the headaches of John Charles I and of the harmful news for the Spanish Monarchy are the courts.

Leave a Comment