CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 5 septembre 2024

.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 } Published on 23 September 2024   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 30633/23 José PÉREZ LÓPEZ against Spain lodged on 26 July 2023 communicated on 5 September 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged failure to summon the applicant in the framework of civil proceedings. The judicial decision ordering the payment of the debt, the seizure of the defendants’ assets and the summon of the defendants was notified to a relative of the applicant’s former wife and subsequent decisions were served via public announcement. The applicant claims that he became aware of such proceedings only when his bank accounts were seized several years later. Relying on Article 6, the applicant alleges a violation of his right to a fair trial. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant 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 during the civil proceedings were allegedly not personally served on him (see Dilipak and Karakaya v. Turkey , nos. 7942/05 and 24838/05, 4 March 2014; Gankin and Others v. Russia , nos. 2430/06 and   3   others, 31 May 2016; Schmidt v. Latvia , no. 22493/05, 27 April 2017; Karesvaara and Njie v. Spain [Committee], no. 60750/15, 15 December 2020 and Klopstra v. Spain [Committee], no. 65610/16, 19 January 2021)?   The parties are requested to submit a copy of the decision of 4 January 1999, the judgment of 14 January 1999 and the seizure order of 27 March 2017 of the Almería First Instance Court no. 2.