Esperanza Aguirre’s husband, Fernando Ramírez de Haro, was ordered to pay €853,732.83 to a brother for a Goya painting he sold in 2012 that belonged to the family. Fernando Ramirez de Haro, according to the ruling seen by El País, sold the property Goyawhich was part of the father’s undivided inheritance (he died in 2010), to businessman Juan Miguel Villar Mir for a total price of €5,800,000 (Sotheby’s, as intermediary for the private sale, retained €684,400). The ruling, against which an appeal is still pending, indicates that the husband of the former president of the Madrid Community never returned to his brothers what they were entitled to in exchange for selling the painting and forced him to do so.
The painting, a portrait of Valentin Belvis de Moncada Pizarro, Count of Bornos like Aguirre’s husband, had been in his home in central Madrid for years when Ramírez de Haro, under pressure from creditors, decided to put it up for sale through Sotheby’s. He agreed in writing with his brothers that he would give them his share when his financial condition improved.
Iñigo Ramírez de Haro, Fernando’s brother, filed suit for the first time through criminal proceedings. In his complaint, he accused his brother of deceiving him and fabricating a false donation to facilitate the procedures. But the Madrid court, even admitting that the donation was “invented,” rejected the case in 2023, considering that the brothers “are exempt from criminal liability and are only subject to civil liability.” Since it was an agreement between the brothers, the judges concluded that there was no crime. Iñigo Ramírez de Haro then moved to civil proceedings, and last September the trial was heard for sentencing.
The ruling dated November 14 stated that “the obligation obtained by the defendant towards his brothers is valid and legally enforceable.” “The failure to specify a time period and means of approving the availability of money does not prevent the debt from being enforceable, as it is considered that a reasonable period has passed that does not allow for further delay in implementing what was agreed upon.”