6.  The applicant, Mr Artur Zirajewski, was a Polish national who was born in 1971 and who died in 2010. His ex-wife, Ms Elżbieta Zirajewska, decided to pursue the application in his stead. 7.  On 29 April 1998 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of homicide and robbery. 8.  On 30 April 1998 the Gdańsk District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) ordered the applicant’s detention on remand. In its decision, the court relied on the reasonable suspicion that the applicant had committed the offences with which he had been charged, the gravity of the charges and the severity of the anticipated sentence. It also pointed to the existence of a high risk that the applicant, if released, would attempt to tamper with the evidence or to intimidate witnesses, or to abscond. At the same time, the court found no special grounds, related to the applicant’s health or to his family life, militating against his detention. 9.  In the course of the proceedings, the applicant’s detention was prolonged on numerous occasions. In their decisions, the courts repeatedly relied on the original grounds given for the applicant’s detention, invoked in the initial detention order. 10.  On 31 July 2000 the bill of indictment was filed with the Gdańsk Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy). The applicant and eight other persons were indicted with homicide, several counts of robbery and various other offences committed in an organised criminal group. 11.  The trial began on 14 December 2000. 12.  On 29 July 2003 the Gdańsk Regional Court convicted the applicant as charged and sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment. The applicant appealed. 13.  On 16 December 2004 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) quashed the first‑instance judgment and remitted the case. 14.  Between 16 and 26 August 2005 the applicant served a prison sentence which had been imposed on him in other criminal proceedings. 15.  On 24 August 2007 the Gdańsk Regional Court once more convicted the applicant as charged and again sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment. The applicant appealed. 16.  On 7 January 2008 the applicant filed a request for release from detention. 17.  On 8 January 2008 the Gdańsk Regional Court dismissed his request. It considered that the applicant’s involvement in the offences with which he had been charged had been supported by the non-final judgment of 24 August 2007, in which he had been convicted and received a severe sentence. The court also held that further detention on remand was the only preventive measure capable of securing the proper course of the proceedings until the delivery of a final judgment. In particular, the court pointed to the high risk of the applicant’s absconding, resulting from the severity of the imposed penalty. Lastly, the court considered that the applicant’s intention to apply for an early release from prison, which he had expressed in his request, had been irrelevant to the issue of extending his detention. 18.  The applicant appealed against the above decision. On 15 January 2008 the Gdańsk Regional Court, in a different composition, dismissed the applicant’s appeal, essentially restating the reasons invoked in its decision of 8 January 2008. 19.  On 19 February 2008 the Gdańsk Regional Court again extended the applicant’s detention until 24 August 2008. 20.  As a result of the applicant’s appeal, the Gdańsk Court of Appeal varied the Regional Court’s decision and extended the applicant’s detention only until 31 May 2008. The court first of all made clear that lifting the detention order or commuting it to another, less rigorous preventive measure, would be unacceptable in the circumstances of the case. Further, it restated the grounds invoked in the previous decisions which had extended the applicant’s detention and confirmed that these grounds remained valid. Lastly, the Court of Appeal concluded that, given the nature and the gravity of the applicant’s charges, the period of his detention on remand had not been excessive. It nevertheless acknowledged that the overall duration of the applicant’s detention had been relatively long, and considered it appropriate to shorten the period for which it would be further extended. 21.  On 19 November 2008 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal upheld the judgment given by the court of first instance. 22.  On 16 November 2008 the applicant filed a complaint under the Law of 17 June 2004 on complaints about a breach of the right to a trial within a reasonable time (ustawa o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki – “the 2004 Act”). He sought a finding that the length of the proceedings had been excessive and claimed compensation. 23.  On 27 October 2010 the Gdańsk Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s complaint. It pointed to the complexity of the impugned proceedings and to the considerable number of witnesses and procedural motions filed by the parties. It further noted that the lower court had conducted 64 hearings in the period from 14 December 2000 to 22 July 2003 and 22 hearings from 21 December 2005 to 17 August 2007. The Court of Appeal noted that, out of the total number of hearings, only 10 had been adjourned – four times due to the judges’ sick leave, twice because of the lack of possibility to transport the accused to the court building, and four times due to the non-appearance of defence counsel. The Court of Appeal considered that the Regional Court had adequately organised the conduct of the impugned proceedings and noted that it had often had recourse to disciplinary measures aimed at enforcing the appearance of witnesses who had failed to attend. It concluded that the length of the impugned proceedings had not been excessive and that there had been no periods of significant inactivity on the part of the lower court. Consequently, it refused to award the applicant any compensation.