4.  The applicant was born in 1954 and lives in Košice. 5.  On 13 September 1999 the applicant lodged an action with the Košice I District Court in which he claimed distribution of marital property. 6.  On 3 November 2006 the Constitutional Court found that the District Court had breached the applicant’s right to a hearing within a reasonable time. It granted 60,000 Slovak korunas (that sum was equivalent to 1,650 euros (EUR) at that time) to the applicant as just satisfaction, ordered the District Court to avoid further delays in the proceedings and to reimburse the applicant’s costs. 7.  On 20 January 2010 the Constitutional Court found that the District Court had again breached the applicant’s right to a hearing within a reasonable time in the period subsequent to the first judgment of the Constitutional Court. It granted the applicant EUR 1,500 as just satisfaction and ordered the District Court to reimburse the applicant’s costs. The Constitutional Court confirmed the validity of its order of 3 November 2006 that further delays in the proceedings should be avoided. 8.  On 10 March 2010 the District Court heard an expert. On 15 April 2010 it asked a different expert for additional opinion. It was submitted on 11 October 2010. Between 20 April 2011 and 19 August 2011 the District Court held three hearings and obtained additional evidence. On the last mentioned day the court orally delivered a judgment. On 11 November 2011 the judge instructed the District Court’s registry to have the judgment with reasons served on the parties. On 15 November 2011 the District Court delivered a decision rectifying the judgment of 19 August 2011. 9.  According to the information submitted by the applicant on 24 February 2012 both parties lodged an appeal and the proceedings are pending.