Print friendly
The Vatican’s £124m investment property deal with a British financier will be scrutinised by the English Courts.
It will be the first time in the Vatican’s 2,000 year history it has had to appear before UK judges. Some are calling it the trial of the century.
The issue involves a complex land deal in London involving a former Harrods warehouse.
The English Courts have been told there are irregularities and abuses in the real estate’s purchase in 2014. It will hear whether the Vatican knowingly inflated the price of the building in the British capital.
The Vatican has also been examining the case since last July. It is trying 11 defendants including Cardinal Angelo Becciu on charges of fraud, abuse, providing false information, corruption, money laundering and disclosure of secret documents.
British-Swiss financier Raffaele Mincione (pictured) was among those against whom charges were brought. He’s the one bringing charges against the Vatican via the English Courts.
On one side, Vatican prosecutors claim Mincione committed fraud by inflating the price when his companies sold the property in 2018.
On the other, Mincione denies the allegations and stands by the property valuation which he says was provided by independent experts.
Furthermore, the Vatican has provided no evidence of his alleged wrongdoings or of the monetary loss, he says.
Mincione’s civil action in England aims to counter publicity and protect his reputation.
The Vatican tried to counter his claim, arguing that English courts had no jurisdiction to rule on its investment.
An English hearing would also interfere with the Vatican’s criminal investigation, with “legitimate acts of a foreign state” and would serve “no useful purpose” the Vatican argued.
However, the British judges decided the Vatican’s argument of sovereign immunity doesn’t exist in this case, because the property deal involved a commercial transaction.
The British court has the right to examine the documents on the sale of real estate, the judges ruled. It also has the right to decide whether all parties to the transaction acted in good faith.
At this point, it is unclear who exactly will be the witnesses in this case or when the case might be heard.
Source
Related Posts:
News category: World.
