just a few days ago, Rocio Carrasco y Olga Moreno faces were seen again in court. The reason? The demand that the daughter of Rocio Jurado filed against the ex-wife of Antonio David Flores for slander and right to honor for some statements that the Sevillian made about her and her null relationship with her children Rocío and David in the Deluxe a 2019. A Informalia We already told that Olga was confident of winning this lawsuit.
This is a new chapter in the endless legal battle that they have been waging for years and for which Rocío asked the winner of Survivors 2021 compensation for moral damages of 90,000 euros plus the costs of the procedure. He also demanded that, from now on, Olga not speak about her again.
Read also – Rocío Carrasco: the amount claimed from Olga Moreno in her lawsuit
As well, Europa Press He has been able to access the sentence in which the Supreme Court has dismissed the lawsuit filed by the daughter of La eldest. They conclude that Olga did not violate Rocío’s right to honor or personal and family privacy.
In its ruling, the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court explains: “Ruling. That I dismiss the lawsuit filed by Ms. Rocío Carrasco Mohedano against Ms. Olga Moreno Obrero and the entity RBA Revistas SL and I must and do acquit the defendants of all the motions made against him and all this with express imposition of the costs caused to the plaintiff”.
Read also: The hardest and most tense sixty minutes between Rocío Carrasco and that woman, Olga Moreno in court
The judge points out that in this case “freedom of expression/information prevails, especially if it is about characters with public projection”, and gives the woman from Fidel Albiac noting that she herself has conducted interviews for gossip magazines, putting “at risk the privacy that she so zealously defends in successive interviews.” In addition, she points out that having participated in “society chronicle” programs, her life and her opinions must be classified as of general interest.
And they sentence: “Whatever the opinion that this television genre deserves, who voluntarily offers to participate in it, in the case of the plaintiff, generating controversy in order to achieve its appearance in successive programs thanks to extravagant or scandalous patterns of behavior, cannot claim that his honor is protected against expressions objectively”.