CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 novembre 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Communicated on 16 April 2018 and 19 November 2019   THIRD SECTION Application no. 3087/17 Maria Isabel ITURBE ABASOLO and Alaitz PEREZ DE ARENAZA ITURBE against Spain and 2 others – see appended list   The facts and complaints in these applications have been summarised in the Court’s Statement of facts and Questions to the parties, which is available in HUDOC. QUESTIONS 1.     Was Article 6 § 2 applicable to the compensation proceedings brought by the applicant(s)? In particular, were there prior criminal proceedings?   2.     In case of a positive answer to the previous question, was there a link between those compensation proceedings and any prior criminal proceedings against the applicants’ relatives (or the applicants themselves) concerning their alleged membership of a terrorist organisation (see, by way of comparison, Larrañaga Arando v. Spain and 3 other applications (dec.), no. 73911/16 and 3 Others, §§   40-52, 18 July 2019, and Martínez Agirre and Otegi Martínez (dec.), no. 75529/16 and 1 other, §§ 38-52, 18 July 2019) ?   3.     If so, were the reasons given by the domestic courts for refusing to increase the applicants’ compensation compatible with the principle of presumption of innocence guaranteed by Article 6 § 2?"   APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Represented by 1 3087/17 Iturbe Abasolo and Perez de Arenaza Iturbe 19/12/2016 Iñigo IRUIN SANZ 2 9295/17 A.I.I. and Others 19/01/2017 Jaime ELIAS ORTEGA 3 68291/17 Muguruza Bartolome and Bartolome Llamazares 01/09/2017 Ibon ALTUNA GOIRIZELAIA