4.  The first six applicants were born in 1946, 1940, 1936, 1945, 1937 and 1941 respectively and live in Israel. The seventh applicant was born in 1920 and died in 2004. 5.  In 1950, a building and 1,683 sq. m of appurtenant land situated in Mediaş, Piaţa Regele Ferdinand no. 2, the property of F.A., Z.E. and K.I., were seized by the State under Decree no. 92/1950 on nationalisation. 6.  In 1974 the property was divided up and registered under two topographical numbers: 200-201/2/1 and 200-201/2/2. Title to the immovable property under number 200-201/2/2 was registered in the names of M.I. and M.A., and the immovable property under the first number was divided into six apartments together with the corresponding appurtenant land. 7.  On 21 May 2001 the applicants, as heirs of F.A., Z.E. and K.I., lodged an application with the administrative authorities for return of property under Law no. 10/2001 governing immovable property wrongfully seized by the State. 8.  On 11 December 2002 the Mayor of Mediaş upheld in part their request and ordered the return of Apartments 1, 2 and 4, since they had not been sold by the State to third parties. As to the land appurtenant to those three apartments, their request for restitution was rejected on the ground that the applicants did not have Romanian nationality. The Mayor also dismissed their request in respect of Apartments 3, 5, 6 and that registered under the number 200-201/2/2 on the ground that they had been sold under Law no. 112/1995. However, he held that the applicants would receive pecuniary compensation for those apartments. 9.  The applicants contested the Mayor’s decision before the courts, claiming restitution of the whole property. 10.  On 4 March 2003 the Sibiu County Court upheld in part their action, annulled the provision regarding the land appurtenant to Apartments 1, 2 and 4, and ordered the Mediaş Town Council to enable the applicants to recover that land. It took into account that three of them had proved their Romanian nationality before the court. The court considered that the whole property, namely the building and 1,683 sq. m of appurtenant land, had been unlawfully seized by the State. It also noted that the State had in its ownership only Apartments 1, 2 and 4 with the appurtenant land and held that the applicants only had a right of compensation under Article 18 (d) of Law no. 10/2001 for the apartments transferred to third parties. 11.  The applicants appealed, claiming the whole property. 12.  On 17 June 2003 the Alba Iulia Court of Appeal dismissed their appeal. It held that the previous court had rightly established that the four items of immovable property which had not been restored had been sold in accordance with Law no. 112/1995 and that the applicants were entitled only to compensation under Article 18 (d) of Law no. 10/2001. 13.  On 18 May 2005 the High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed by a final decision a further appeal by the applicants. 14.  On 5 June 2006 the Mayor of Mediaş varied the provisions of the administrative decision of 11 December 2002 and authorised the applicants to recover the land appurtenant to Apartments 1, 2 and 4. He also held that for the other four apartments, which were impossible to recover, the applicants had a right to pecuniary compensation under Law no. 247/2005. 15.  So far the applicants have not received any compensation for the part of the property that was considered impossible to recover.