Legal Proceedings Involving José María del Nido Carrasco

José María del Nido Carrasco appeared on Tuesday, January 27, at the Investigating Court No. 14 in Seville as a suspect in a possible corporate crime. This follows a legal complaint filed by his father, José María del Nido Benavente, which has been accepted for processing. The principal shareholder claimed that during the Extraordinary General Meeting of Shareholders held on March 27, 2025, he was denied the right to vote, despite having precautionary measures that mandated the board of directors to allow his participation as per a ruling from Commercial Court No. 2 issued just three days before the meeting (205/2025).

Throughout this ongoing shareholder conflict between the current president and his father, five similar complaints filed by the club’s principal shareholder have been archived. In addition to summoning Del Nido Carrasco for questioning, the judge has requested the notarial record of the March 2025 meeting, along with an audiovisual recording and an audio copy.

Two days prior to that meeting, Del Nido Benavente addressed Sevilla fans on social media, stating, “The judge has granted us the precautionary measures, and I will be able to vote freely in the upcoming Shareholders’ Meeting. It is time for all Sevilla supporters to unite to remove Del Nido Carrasco and Castro Carmona and prevent them from ruining Sevilla Football Club.” Ultimately, he was not allowed to vote at the assembly on March 27, which marked the eighth such gathering in less than two years, where the Council was bolstered by the support of the ‘Americans,’ represented by Juan de Dios Crespo.

Following the meeting, the former president went directly to the court to report what he perceives as a breach of judicial authority by his son, José María del Nido Carrasco. “The court had notified him that he could not deny me my voting rights, and he has done so, indicating that the agreement is binding in this regard. This is not the case, and we have brought it to the attention of the duty judge. He will have to face the consequences of committing an offense if the judicial authority deems it necessary,” he asserted.