Former Spanish king argues immunity in legal hearing over ex-lover's harassment claims
Corinna Larsen says privileges as a monarch do not protect Juan Carlos I in matters of a private nature
The defense team of former Spanish king John Charles I has argued that the former monarch is protected by immunity in Tuesday's hearing at the Court of Appeal in London over the harassment claims of his ex-lover, Corinna Larsen.
Larsen's lawyer, on the other hand, argued that the former king's immunity does not protect him when it comes to acts carried out to protect his private interests, rather than the interests of Spain.
The magistrates of the British Civil Court of Appeal will have to determine whether the former king can be tried for events that occurred between 2012 and 2014 and which involve the Spanish secret services and their former head, Félix Sanz Roldán.
The claim is based on alleged harassment by King Juan Carlos, such as surveillance at the hands of Spanish National Intelligence Agency (CNI) agents, Larsen said in June 2021 when she filed the complaint with the English and Welsh court.
The ex-lover also stated that, since 2012, she had been suffering "threats," "libel," and forced her into a "depression" that isolated her from her kids, friends, and business partners.
Larsen, who is also sometimes referred to as Corinna zu Sayn-Wittgenstein, has also complained of attempts by secret agents allegedly linked with Juan Carlos I, to break into her home or place a tracking device on her car.
In Tuesday's hearing, her legal team argued that immunity is limited when it comes to facts that were not part of the official functions of Joan Carlos I.
On the other hand, the ex-monarch's lawyers have defended that the actions of Juan Carlos I and the CNI cannot be separated from their role as head of state, and therefore the involvement of the CNI indicates that it is not a private matter.
Tuesday's hearing addresses the appeal presented by Juan Carlos I against the decision of the British magistrate Matthew Nicklin who considered that he cannot be granted immunity due to having abdicated the throne in 2014.
In March, the court rejected his immunity claims, arguing he is no longer a head of state. "The fact that the Defendant has been accorded a special constitutional status in Spain does not make him a sovereign," the ruling reads. "Since he abdicated in 2014, the Defendant is not the head of state of Spain," the court stated.