Denial of Legal Aid for Investigating Court No. 3 of Alicante

Law 1/1996 on Free Legal Assistance conditions the benefit on the insufficiency of resources. This file documents how that criterion was applied — and to whom.

The act and its economic context

• Denial of legal aid for the defence on the front of Investigating Court No. 3 of Alicante (2017), despite the economic documentation provided.
• On the same dates the following are on record: the provincial debt claimed (A.7), the AEAT's assessments and attachments in two countries (A.41) and the VAT retained and not refunded (A.42, A.46).
• The appeal against the denial is not on record as answered: neither granted, nor dismissed.

The incompatibility between files

The enforcement files of the period presuppose attachable assets; the legal-aid file concludes sufficient solvency to fund a lawyer. Both conclusions, maintained by the same administrations about the same person and on the same dates, are on record in writing — and cannot both be true with the assets already enforced.

The effect on the Alicante front

Without court-appointed counsel, the complaints and appeals of the tax front (A.42, A.43, A.47) advanced in structural inequality against an Administration with permanent legal services. The pattern replicates that of Bilbao (A.15): two venues, two denials, the same blind spot.

How to verify it

Place the date of the denial beside the dates of the attachments (A.41). Then look for the resolution of the appeal. A contradiction and a silence: both verifiable.