4.  The applicant was born in 1948 and lives in the town of Netishyn, Khmelnytsk region, Ukraine. 5.  The applicant worked as a guard in the private enterprise “Ekspromt”. She was allegedly dismissed on 1 November 1998. 6.  On 25 November 1999 the applicant instituted proceedings in the Netishynskyy Town Court against her former employer claiming salary arrears. 7.  On 22 December 1999, 1 February and 22 February 2000 the hearings in the applicant's case were postponed due to the defendant's failure to appear before the court. 8.  On 13 June 2000 the defendant failed to appear again. The court decided to consider the case in the absence of defendant. The applicant was heard and the court adjourned the hearing in order to summon witnesses. 9.  On 23 June 2000 the court heard a witness and adjourned the hearing in order to collect additional evidence. 10.  On 10 July 2000 the court sent a letter to the defendant informing it that if it failed to appear at court, a sanction would be imposed. 11.  On 19 September 2000 the court heard another witness and adjourned the hearing. 12.  On 20 September 2000 the court found in part for the applicant. The applicant was not present in court hearing. 13.  On 17 October 2000 the applicant requested the court to replace the judge in her case and was informed that the judgment had already been adopted. 14.  On 27 June 2001 the Khmelnytskiy Regional Court quashed this judgment upon the protest of the Deputy Head of the Khmelnytskiy Regional Court under the extraordinary review procedure and remitted the case for a fresh consideration. 15.  On 20 May 2002 proceedings in the case were resumed. 16.  On 11 June 2002 the proceedings in the applicant's case were stayed pending the consideration of her second labour case (see Second set of proceedings). 17.  On 12 July 2002 the applicant requested the court to replace judge Kh. in her case. The applicant's representative, Mr L., alleged that judge Kh. adopted particularly unfavourable decisions in Mr L.'s cases. 18.  On 30 August 2002 the court satisfied the applicant's request “in order to avoid such statements in the future”. On the same date the proceedings were resumed. 19.  On 28 January 2003 the defendant failed to appear. The hearing was adjourned as the applicant allegedly insisted on the defendant's presence. 20.  On 15 April 2003 the defendant again failed to appear. The hearing was adjourned. 21.  On 3 July 2003 the prosecutor inquired with the police about the address of the defendant. 22.  On 27 August 2003 the prosecutor inquired the Slavuta Tax Inspection about the address of the defendant. 23.  On 3 September 2003 the hearing in the case was postponed as the parties failed to appear. 24.  On 10 October 2003 the hearing was postponed as the defendant failed to appear. 25.  On 20 October 2003 the applicant was heard. The court adjourned the hearing on the applicant's request because of the unsatisfactory state of her health. 26.  On 23 October 2003 the applicant informed the court that she would be represented by her brother and by a prosecutor's assistant. 27.  On 6 April 2004 the court heard the parties and adjourned the hearing in order to summon witnesses. 28.  On 25 May 2004 the hearing was postponed as the defendant's representative and witnesses failed to appear. 29.  On 1 June 2004 the court heard a witness and adjourned the hearing. 30.  On 10 June 2004 the court heard the applicant's representative and a witness and adjourned the hearing. 31.  On 14 June 2004 the hearing was postponed as the parties' representatives failed to appear. 32.  On 23 June 2004 the court heard a witness. 33.  On 30 June 2004 the Netishynskyy Town Court found in part for the applicant and awarded her UAH 2,135.33 of salary arrears. The applicant did not appeal against this judgment. 34.  On 16 October 2000 the applicant instituted another set of proceedings in the Netishynskyy Town Court challenging her dismissal. 35.  On 29 December 2000 the court found against the applicant. 36.  On 26 April 2001 the Khmelnytskyy Regional Court quashed this judgment and remitted the case for a fresh consideration. 37.  On 7 November 2001 the Netishynskyy District Court reinstated the applicant in her position and awarded her UAH 2,610 in salary arrears. 38.  On 20 March 2002 the Khmelnytskyy Regional Court upheld this judgment. 39.  On 4 January 2003 the Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected the applicant's cassation appeal.