5.  The applicant was born in 1919 and lives in Bogoria, Poland. 6.  On 5 July 1974 the applicant’s husband filed with the Staszów District Court (sąd rejonowy) an action in which he sought a declaration that he and other relatives inherited the property of his late father. 7.  On 30 November 1977 the court issued the relevant decision. Some of the participants in the proceedings lodged an appeal against it. 8.  On 14 April 1978 the Tarnobrzeg Regional Court (sąd wojewódzki) amended that decision in part and dismissed the remainder of the appeal. 9.  On 21 December 1981 the applicant filed with the Staszów District Court a petition in which she requested the division of the inherited property. 10.  On 27 August 1992 the court issued a partial decision. The applicant appealed it. 11.  On 24 June 1993 the Tarnobrzeg Regional Court quashed that decision and remitted the case for re-examination. 12.  On 15 June 1994 the applicant challenged participation in the proceedings of all the judges from the Staszów District Court. 13.  On 7 October 1994 the Regional Court dismissed that challenge. She appealed against that decision. 14.  On 14 November 1994 the President of the Regional Court, in reply to the applicant’s complaint about the excessive length of the proceedings, wrote a letter informing her that the case was very complex and that she contributed to the delay by her numerous petitions. 15.  On 24 February 1995 the Rzeszów Court of Appeal (sąd apelacyjny) amended the Regional Court’s decision of 7 October 1994 in that it excluded four judges from participation in the proceedings. 16.  On 29 May 1995 the District Court held a hearing. It stayed the proceedings, because three participants had died. The court ordered the applicant to provide information concerning their legal successors. 17.  On 11 December 1995 the court refused the applicant’s request to have the proceedings resumed. It noted that she had failed to provide the addresses of the heirs of one of the participants in the proceedings and submitted only that they lived in the United States. 18.  On 12 July 1996 the District Court refused the applicant’s subsequent request in this respect. It relied, inter alia, on the fact that she had failed to specify whether the persons concerned had Polish or American nationality, which made it impossible for the court to serve summonses on them. The applicant appealed that decision. 19.  On 7 November 1996 the Regional Court quashed the appealed decision and ordered its re-examination by the District Court. 20.  On 7 April 1998 the District Court resumed the proceedings. On the same date it decided to appoint a guardian ad litem for absent participants in the proceedings and announce that fact in a newspaper. 21.  On 22 September 1998 the President of the District Court informed the applicant that the newspaper which the court had requested to publish the announcement had not replied. The President resolved to undertake necessary steps in order to ensure a more expeditious examination of the case. 22.  On 22 June 1999 the Regional Court excluded a judge from participation in the proceedings and transferred the case to the Opatów District Court. 23.  On 29 September 1999 four judges from the latter court requested to be excluded from participation in the proceedings due to their personal relations with one of the participants. 24.  On 28 July 2000 the applicant was ordered to submit certain pleadings and provide information about the nationality of the participants residing in the United States. In reply, she submitted that she did not know whether they had a Polish nationality. 25.  In August 2000 the District Court summoned the applicant to make an advance payment to cover the costs of translating letters rogatory and sending them to the United States. In reply, the applicant stated that the participants residing there spoke fluent Polish and thus translation was not necessary. 26.  On 28 September 2000 the court stayed the proceedings, relying on the applicant’s failure to comply with its order. 27.  On 26 February 2001 the applicant requested that the proceedings be resumed and submitted a letter from the Polish consulate in Chicago, from which it transpired that the persons concerned had not renounced their Polish nationality. 28.  On 16 March 2001 the court refused that request. The applicant appealed. 29.  On 17 July 2001 the Rzeszów Regional Court transferred the appeal against that decision to the Kielce Regional Court. 30.  On 24 October 2001 the latter court rejected the appeal. 31.  On 25 January 2002 the Opatów District Court once again refused to resume the proceedings. 32.  On 8 February 2002 the applicant appealed against that decision. 33.  The proceedings are still pending.