The Vatican insisted Thursday at the close of a trial in Britain that it was the victim of a yearslong fraud over its investment in a London property, arguing that one of its main brokers by no means acted “in good faith.”

The Vatican submitted a concluding statement at the close of the trial brought by British-Italian broker Raffaele Mincione. A verdict is expected after the summer.

Mincione is seeking to clear his name in the British courts after he was convicted by a Vatican criminal tribunal last year for his role in the Holy See’s 350-million-euro ($375 million) investment in the former Harrod’s warehouse. He is asking the British High Court to declare that he acted “in good faith” in his dealings with the Vatican.

The Holy See had tried unsuccessfully to get the case dismissed, but once on trial, doubled down on its claims that Mincione and a fellow broker engaged in a conspiracy to fleece it of millions of euros by inflating the cost of the building when the Vatican decided it wanted to buy it fully in late 2018.

“The (secretariat of state’s) position is that the claimants obviously did not act in good faith,” the Vatican submission said.

It urged the High Court to reject Mincione’s request for a series of declarations attesting to his “good faith” work. The Vatican argued that the burden was on Mincione to prove that everything he did was aboveboard. Mincione says the prices quoted were accurate.

“If the claimants cannot show that they did in fact act in good faith at all material times in the lead up to the transaction, the entire house of cards upon which the claim is founded falls down,” the Vatican submission said.

The London case, believed to be the first time the Holy See has been put on trial in a foreign court, is part of the collateral damage that the Vatican has incurred in deciding to prosecute 10 people for a range of financial crimes surrounding its money-losing London investment.

The Vatican court in December convicted nine of the 10 people, including Mincione and a cardinal, though its reasonings still haven’t been published.