Application for Interim Measures before the Alicante Court
Apolozan case · ERDF fraud (Bilbao / Alicante / EU)
Six months after the first interim measure (A.53), the situation forced a second. Its course documents the state of the front.
The brief
- Filed on 11 August 2021 by the claimant of proceedings 444/2020 (A.52).
- It reiterates the urgency: the subsistence of the family unit during the pendency of the dispute.
- It invokes, among other points, the VAT retained since 2002 without refund (A.46) — liquidity owed by the same enforcing Administration.
What is on record of the procedure
- No resolution: neither granting, nor denying, nor of non-admission.
- The forwarding of the matter from one court to another — the same mechanism of circulation without examination documented on the criminal front (A.43).
- The continued pendency of the main procedure while the interim harm was consummated (A.55).
The measure of the silence
An interim measure without a response is not a denied interim measure: it is a procedure that does not function even to say no. Article 130 of the Contentious-Administrative Jurisdiction Act presupposes a reasoned decision one way or the other; the file contains none.
How to verify it
Locate in the 444/2020 the resolution of this application. Its absence — the second consecutive one — is the annex.
Documentary evidence · A.54 · 11 August 2021 · Investigation and coercion
EuroFraud case file · every statement links to its document (A.X / DOC-XXXX). Evidentiary material; every person named is presumed innocent.