38 MAMATKULOV AND ASKAROV v. TURKEY JUDGMENT A. Damage 131. Before the Grand Chamber, the applicants' representatives repeated the claims they had made before the Chamber for pecuniary damage and non-pecuniary damage in the sum of 1,000,000 French francs, that is, 304,898 euros (EUR), for each of their clients. 132. The Chamber found as follows (see paragraph 115 of the Chamber judgment): “As the applicants have not specified the nature of their alleged pecuniary damage, the Court has no alternative but to dismiss that claim. As regards the alleged nonpecuniary damage, the Court holds that its finding concerning Article 34 constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction for the purposes of Article 41.” 133. The Government said that they could accept the Chamber's findings in the event of the Grand Chamber finding a violation of the Convention. In the alternative, they submitted that the amounts claimed were exorbitant. 134. Like the Chamber, the Court does not consider that the alleged pecuniary damage has been proved. Conversely, it finds in the circumstances of the case that the applicants undeniably suffered non-pecuniary damage as a result of Turkey's breach of Article 34 which cannot be repaired solely by a finding that the respondent State has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34. Consequently, ruling on an equitable basis in accordance with Article 41 of the Convention, the Court awards each applicant EUR 5,000 for nonpecuniary damage. B. Costs and expenses 135. The applicants' representatives repeated the claims they had made before the Chamber and left the question of their fees for the proceedings before the Grand Chamber to the Court's discretion. 136. The Government considered that the claim for costs and expenses had not been properly proved. 137. For the proceedings up until the Chamber judgment, the Chamber awarded the applicants EUR 10,000, less EUR 905 that had been paid by the Council of Europe in legal aid. 138. The Court awards the applicants EUR 15,000 to cover all the costs incurred in the Court, less EUR 2,613.17 received from the Council of Europe in legal aid. C. Default interest 139. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.