CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 9 février 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 9 February 2017     THIRD SECTION Application no. 60750/15 Katarina Kirsi Kristiina KARESVAARA and Sulayman NJIE against Spain lodged on 3 December 2015 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicants’ right of access to a court and to judicial remedies within the framework of eviction proceedings instituted against them. The applicants claim that they only became aware of such proceedings when their bank account was seized. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Did the applicants have effective access to a court and to judicial remedies in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention having regard to the fact that the decisions rendered by the court of first instance within the framework of the proceedings instituted against the applicants were not personally served on them?