The High Court of England and Wales has concluded that the king emeritus, Juan Carlos I, cannot be tried in England over an alleged abuse lawsuit filed by Corinna Larsen seeking 126 million pounds (around 146 million euros) in compensation. compensation. “My main conclusion is that the High Court of England and Wales does not have jurisdiction to hear this claim. This is because the lawsuit has not been filed against the defendant in his country of residence, as is his default right; and the plaintiff “has not satisfied Me that he has a strong and tenable argument that his claims fall within the exception to the default rule,” said Judge Rowena Collins Rice. In the resolution, which was accessible to Europa Press, the judge explained that – although he considered competent to adjudicate the matter – “he would reject Larsen’s” request because his request “does not comply with the rules of justice. applicable to the drafting of harassment complaints.” As the judge stated in 92 pages, Corinna Larsen’s lawsuit “does not show that any evidence can link” the incidents of harassment she denounced “directly” to Juan Carlos I. “The direct perpetrator was not identified and (not ) can be identified,” he added. The judge concluded that the logic Larsen defended risked being a “false syllogism.” “It was the enemy’s act, the defendant was his enemy, therefore it was his “her own public profile” in which she “actively participates.” and where he is connected to the “powerful, rich, competitive and famous.” Based on the same analysis, he dismissed the argument that the king emeritus was responsible for the leaks that gave rise to publications in the media about Larsen. “He gave no indication of how he could prove any relationship with the defendant,” he said. HARASSMENT IS NOT ACCREDITED IN THE UK Corinna Larsen reported in her lawsuit that Juan Carlos I had harassed her after she ended the relationship they had. First to ensure that they continued the relationship and then as revenge to harm her business, according to Larsen. The businesswoman is demanding compensation from the king emeritus for the costs of medical treatment for her mental health, for “the installation of personal security measures and daily protective services” and for the hiring of “former diplomats and former government officials” to intervene in order to “end the harassment ” which he said he had received. But the judge deemed Larsen “had failed to turn her narrative into a claim of harassment.” According to him, Juan Carlos I’s former close friend “did not identify or allege any particular experience of abuse” in England, but rather a series of actions that would have occurred “wherever he was at the time, which sometimes happened in England.” “If the experience cannot be said to have occurred in a country – for example, because the claimant is domiciled, is ordinarily resident, or was physically present in that country at all times – on what basis can an English court assume jurisdiction over a country? unitary court in today’s multinational case?”, stressed the judge. LARSEN, “DISAPPOINTED” WITH VERDICT In a statement issued this Friday after the court’s resolution was announced, Larsen was “extremely disappointed with the outcome”. “It is very sad to see that victims of abuse often have difficulty getting justice in our legal system,” she said. The businesswoman insisted that the “bullying and harassment” she experienced against herself and her children was “continuous” and “aimed” at destroying her “completely”. “Juan Carlos has deployed his entire arsenal to weaken me and the scope of his power was enormous. “I am considering all available options,” he said. The verdict was announced this Friday after last July the court heard arguments from the defense of Juan Carlos I, who is in charge of the British company Velitor Law. DEFENSE OF JOHN CHARLES I The king emeritus’ legal team then requested that Larsen’s lawsuit was annulled, considering that the English courts had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. The defense was based on Article 4 of the EU regulation on jurisdiction, which states that persons domiciled in a Member State, whatever their nationality, must be prosecuted before the courts of that country. The lawyers stated in the report their brief, which was accessible to Europa Press, is that the community rule applies in this particular case because it began before the end of the Brexit transition period, which was set until 31 December 2020. Therefore, they insist that the Spanish Courts are competent to deal with Larsen’s claim. of this, they added that the “key question” was whether, in relation to the alleged acts of abuse, the UK was the place where the alleged ‘harmful event’ or ‘direct harm’ occurred, something which, as they pointed out, Larsen’s lawyers had not demonstrated. Another argument put forward by the defense was the plaintiff’s “lack of credibility.” In this case, they highlighted that Larsen had requested permission to make new modifications to the original complaint. “Like its predecessor, it is incoherent, internally contradictory, and clearly bad as a matter of law,” said the king emeritus’ defense. Furthermore, he stressed that Larsen’s statements – which Juan Carlos I “categorically denied” – were not only “false” but also “inconsistent with public statements made by him” before the litigation began.