1901: Contra CAM y otras partes de la Comunidad de Propietarios and 1956: Contra la AC; a 12 July counsel email records court-office follow-up concerning la denuncia contra CAM y la CP identified as 1901/2026. The signed 12 July providencia then linked that same DP to DIP 2/2026. The evidential weighting is now more specific: Gil's Ref. 21 → DP 1901 chronology is contemporaneously corroborated by his 25 June 11:23 email to Procuradora María Díaz Vecino and the 9 July operational mapping. The official court electronic creation/reparto event and the later mechanism associating the separate Ref. 24 judge material with DP 1901 remain unproduced. Open the June/July source closure → · Open the 14 September order →PROCEDURAL SEPARATION CONTROL
DP 1901/2026
This English gateway exists so the unitary reader journey does not incorrectly substitute another Fiscalía or criminal-procedure route for DP 1901/2026. The detailed controlled documentary dossier is currently maintained in Spanish.
Verified status · 20 September 2026
DP1901 · 20 September: 13 of 13 personal actions registered
The controlled receipts establish thirteen registered actions. A06 and A13 now have registration receipts; substantive handling and A13 formalisation/admission remain post-filing follow-ups. The counsel-dependent judicial remedy and the separate substantive E.G.745 response are outside this count.
Proof ceiling: registration proves the recorded presentation/registration event and, where the receipt itself supplies them, attachment hashes. It does not by itself prove onward transmission, admission, incorporation, examination, agreement, response or institutional action.
| Control | Destination / function | Registration | State |
|---|---|---|---|
| A01 | Decanato / Registro y Reparto via DGRAJ | REGAGE26e00082034813 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A02 | Plaza 6 / DP 1901/2026 | S000000000000144968 + S000000000000144972 (supplement) | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A03 | CGPJ — Alzada 286/2026 | REGAGE26e00082030716 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A04 | Secretaría de Gobierno del TSJC | REGAGE26e00082039117 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A05 | Coordinación Provincial de LAJ | REGAGE26e00082040006 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A06 | National LAJ / Ministry route | REGAGE26e00082058165 | Registered · handling pending |
| A07 | Canary Justice Administration / ATLANTE | REGAGE26e00082038176 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A08 | Fiscalía Provincial de Las Palmas | REGAGE26e00082044751 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A09 | Fiscal Superior de Canarias | REGAGE26e00082032153 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A10 | FGE / Inspección Fiscal | REGAGE26e00082033336 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A11 | Sala de Gobierno via Secretaría de Gobierno del TSJC | REGAGE26e00082052687 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A12 | Defensor del Pueblo | REGAGE26e00082055212 | Registered · receipt controlled |
| A13 | Fiscalía Anticorrupción | REGAGE26e00082060401 | Registered · formalisation/admission pending |
Receipt qualifications that remain visible
- A02: the principal receipt proves four pages and does not list the two planned annexes. The later supplement records an eleven-page combined PDF, but the receipt supplies no document hash; it does not prove byte identity.
- A08: four attachments have receipt-matching hashes; this is a bounded custody/allocation search and does not presume Provincial-Prosecution authorship.
- A09: two identical private copies of the receipt represent one action.
- A10: limited incorporation/preservation of the supervening fact; not the substantive E.G.745 response.
- A11: two PDFs, fifteen pages and matching hashes; a Sala de Gobierno reparto route, separate from A04 and not an appeal.
- A12: four PDFs, thirty-five pages and matching hashes. The filed-text field also contains an extraneous operational tail; its legal effect and any need for correction are undetermined, and no corrective filing is evidenced.
- A06: four PDFs, forty-five pages and receipt-matching hashes. The earlier rejected attempt
REGAGE26e00073341477remains disclosed; substantive handling and a separate prior national alzada registration remain unproved. - A13: five PDFs, fifty pages and receipt-matching hashes. Exp.Gub.352/2025 formalisation/admission and channel questions remain post-filing follow-ups. Do not repeat the whole filings.
20 connected routes do not mean 20 new responses to the Auto
These preserve distinct proceedings, functions and requests. Reconcile previous submissions and production before sending another notice; conditional referrals are not activated merely by the DP1901 archive.
- AEAT — competent tax/inspection unit
- CTBG — complaint concerning AEAT 001-0113069
- CTBG — joint AEAT 001-0112793 + 001-0113066 complaint
- Comisionado de Transparencia de Canarias — Hacienda Res.28/2026 appeal
- CNMV — RICPE/SCR supervisory and infringement-reporting function
- CNMV — public-information request2026114903
- Gobierno de Canarias — regional-incentives processing/custody unit
- State regional-incentives directorate
- Canary Finance / EU-relations body holding FEDER records
- Dirección General de Fondos Europeos / exact State managing function
- Intervención General de Canarias
- Audiencia de Cuentas de Canarias
- Cabildo de Lanzarote / tourism file custodian
- Gobierno de Canarias — tourism register / inspection custodian
- Ayuntamiento de Yaiza
- Comisionado de Transparencia de Canarias — Yaiza access appeal
- SEPI / FASEE — Meeting Point support-operation custodian
- CNMC — C/1549/25 / Portobello–BLUESEA–MPS
- CTBG — planned challenge concerning AC2000001007594
- Gerencia Regional del Catastro de Canarias
The two AEAT/CTBG complaints and proposed AC2000001007594 challenge have distinct legal objects. The exact Yaiza access-appeal identity and final new funds-access challenge package remain open. ORGA is pursued through the competent organ; OLAF, EPPO, SEPBLAC and other routes require their own nexus and threshold.
The private receipt PDFs, address, personal identifiers, signatures, private email, authentication material, full filing bodies and native private filenames are not published. The controlled public record is in the state data; the narrative control is in the operational register.
E.G.745: all 10 deliveries registered. 27 PDFs, 1,272 pages and all 22 illustrations. Every attachment fingerprint matches the official receipts. Receipt-linked status and proof limits.
Boundary
DP 1901/2026, DIP 2/2026 and DP 1956/2026 must remain separate procedural references unless a primary judicial or prosecutorial record expressly connects them for a defined purpose. This page does not create a new merits finding, translate the complete Spanish dossier or alter its latest source-controlled procedural status.
The purpose is narrower: preserve correct routing in English and prevent a reader from treating a nearby procedural file as an equivalent or substitute.
Verified procedural status
A primary order dated 12 July 2026, NIG 3501643220260016977, transferred the matter to the Public Prosecution Service for five days to report on admission, expressly in connection with DIP 2/2026. That proves the judicial transfer and the limited purpose of the requested report. It does not prove final admission, established facts, guilt, coordination or liability.
The later judicial order is now located: the 14 September Auto orders final dismissal/archive and records the 29 July prosecution request for archive. What remains missing is the signed 29 July prosecution report itself, its author/assignment, reasoning and exact source corpus; the initiating/reparto and object-metadata history explaining the state transition; and the native/certified Auto plus legal-notice metadata. The absence of those still-missing sources is not treated as proof of misconduct or non-existence.
ADVERSE POSTURE · FULL EXPRESS NOTICE
Fiscalía is no longer treated as a neutral recipient of this complaint.
Gil Marer and Aweswell Limited's attributed position: in light of the 2019 Fiscal opinion, the 2023 hearing and later handling, the Public Prosecution Service—especially the Canary Islands/Las Palmas offices—is treated as an adverse institutional actor for preservation, notice and recovery. Gil alleges that any informed act which suppresses, fragments, reclassifies, neutralises or leaves uninvestigated the actor-specific economic crimes alleged in DP 1901/2026 may actively enable the scheme, protect its alleged beneficiaries and contribute to continuing patrimonial harm.
This position does not establish the guilt, knowledge, coordination or responsibility of any prosecutor or office. It makes the signed report requested on 12 July 2026, its author and source corpus essential, and requires act, duty, knowledge, causation, lawful explanation and effect to be tested.
Publication of this notice is not proof of formal service, incorporation into the file or personal reading.
A finite extra-insolvency test
The controlled question is whether the electronic court and insolvency records can reconstruct, item by item, the chain request → decision → certification → notice → delivery → external use for the relevant testimony and identify the actor, asset, date, conduct and legal authority involved. That permits distinct modules—Matkator property, Community governance, access/works, operation/income, professional or financing/public-funds issues—to be tested without treating physical or economic proximity to LPB as proof that each module belongs to its insolvency estate.
This classification is a research control, not a merits finding. A module belongs in DP 1901/2026 only where a primary source connects it to the complaint or court file. Related events are not automatically identical events; silence, referral and adverse outcomes do not prove coordination, obstruction, prevarication or criminality.
Corrected Administrator interface
The Insolvency Administrator complaint presented on 18 June 2026 under daily reference 22 remains a separate filing lane. Private-actor material was physically tendered under DP 1901 on 9 July, but the 14 September Auto characterises DP 1901 as alleged judicial prevarication; therefore this page no longer describes DP 1901 as principally or definitively the private-actor cause. Private-actor and Administrator attribution remain actor-specific, and any use of DP 1901 material in Administrator analysis requires an explicit authority, knowledge, capacity, act/omission, consequence or benefit bridge.
Open the controlling removal, remuneration and complaint record →
Named judicial officers · identity layer
Luis Francisco Galván Mesa^ signed the located 12 July 2026 order. The underlying documentary chain also names LAJs Eduardo José Rebollo Sanz^, Águeda Reyes Almeida^ and María Teresa Oliver Guerra^.
^ verifies identity only; each act remains limited to its own signed source, date and capacity.
CAEPR IDENTITY · DP 1901/2026 BOUNDARY
Ricardo de Mosteyrín Sampalo^
No signed prosecution report or primary source has been located attributing an act in DP 1901/2026 to Ricardo de Mosteyrín Sampalo. The link preserves continuity from the 2019 classification opinion and RPL 2523/2025 without converting institutional context into personal attribution.
^ verifies identity only. Open the prosecution, judge, LAJ, notarial and Registry census →
The complete draft now preserves the contemporaneously corroborated Ref. 21 → DP 1901 chronology and the firsthand statement that Ref. 24 remained untouched, unscanned and unallocated on 25 June. Certified court-system creation/reparto and later Ref. 24 association history remain outstanding.
Informational publication only: not a CGPJ filing, not a judicial appeal against the order, and not a filed E.G. 745/2026 response.The Decanato–LAJ–ATLANTE–Prosecution layer is now explicit, with the 8–17 July ATLANTE incident treated as a technical hypothesis to test and the CGPJ–FGE coordinated-inspection agreement identified. No manipulation or liability is inferred.
Open common traceability and referral matrix →