DRAGOJEVIĆ v. CROATIA JUDGMENT 36 above, § 48). When convicting the applicant the Dubrovnik County Court took into account the applicant’s statements and the statements of his coaccused and examined them against the statements of other witnesses and evidence obtained by numerous searches and seizures (see paragraph 45 above). 134. Against the above background, the Court considers that there is nothing to substantiate the conclusion that the applicant’s defence rights were not properly complied with in respect of the evidence adduced or that its evaluation by the domestic courts was arbitrary (see Bykov, cited above, § 98). In conclusion, the Court finds that the use of the impugned recordings in evidence did not as such deprive the applicant of a fair trial. 135. There has accordingly been no violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. III. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION 136. Article 41 of the Convention provides: “If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.” A. Damage 137. The applicant claimed 20,000 euros (EUR) in respect of nonpecuniary damage. 138. The Government considered the applicant’s claim excessive, unfounded and unsubstantiated. 139. Having regard to all the circumstances of the present case, the Court accepts that the applicant has suffered non-pecuniary damage which cannot be compensated for solely by the finding of a violation. Making its assessment on an equitable basis, the Court awards the applicant EUR 7,500 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable to him. B. Costs and expenses 140. The applicant also claimed 16,493.75 Croatian kunas for the costs and expenses incurred before the Court. 141. The Government considered the applicant’s claim unsubstantiated and unfounded. 142. According to the Court’s case-law, an applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as