The emeritus king's lawyers highlight the "inconsistencies" of Corinna Larsen pointed out by the British Justice

MADRID, 6 Dic. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The lawyers representing the king emeritus before the British courts for the harassment lawsuit filed by Corinna Larsen have highlighted the "inconsistencies" of the former close friend of Juan Carlos I that have been revealed by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in the ruling of this Tuesday, where he recognizes immunity to the former head of state until his abdication, in 2014.

In a statement, to which Europa Press has had access, the Carter-Ruck law firm highlights that "in the course of her decision (with which both Judge King and Judge Popplewell agreed), Judge Simler also referred to a series of inconsistencies in the way in which the claimant had directed her allegations to date, beginning with her approach being 'directly contradictory to her statement in the original complaint and to statements made in the Spanish proceedings'".

Along the same lines, the lawyers emphasize that "judge Simler went further by stating that the plaintiff's amended case 'contrasts with the statements she has made to the Spanish press'".

Carter-Ruck also points out that the court has echoed that Don Juan Carlos "emphasizes that he was involved in or directed any harassment of the plaintiff and that he rejects her accusations as false."

"In affirming Her Majesty's appeal, the Court of Appeal establishes that, regardless of such denial, in a correct application of the principles of sovereign immunity 'the alleged pre-abdication conduct is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of this country", United Kingdom, indicates the firm.