CCPR/C/130/D/2780/2016 refusal to proceed with the registration was lawful. In this respect, the Committee also notes that the authors themselves acknowledge that Crédit foncier de France later had the names of the authors published at the Office of the Mortgage Registrar as the true owners. The Committee therefore finds that the authors have not sufficiently substantiated their claim in this regard and that it is inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol. f. Right to full reparation for all damages caused 10.13 The authors are also of the opinion that article 2 (3) of the Covenant was violated, as they have not obtained full reparation for all the harm caused by the violation of articles 14 (1) and 17. The State party considers these claims unfounded, as no application for compensation has ever been submitted to the domestic courts. Moreover, the damages alleged by the authors are connected, in the State party’s view, not to these claims but to legal fees incurred as a result of proceedings in addition to the two proceedings for the seizure and sale at auction of their home 10.14 The Committee notes that the damages in question relate to the legal fees for the various proceedings to which the authors were parties and are a natural consequence of their exercise of their rights. Accordingly, in the absence of any further information on the exhaustion of domestic remedies relating to a full remedy and on the unreasonableness of these fees, the Committee considers that it is precluded by article 5 (2) (b) of the Optional Protocol from examining the present communication, and that the authors have not sufficiently substantiated their claim in this regard; it therefore considers the claim inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol. 11. The Human Rights Committee therefore decides: (a) That the communication is inadmissible under articles 2 and 5 (2) (b) of the Optional Protocol; (b) That the present decision shall be communicated to the State party and the author. 14 GE.21-01892