4.  The applicant was born in 1931 and lives in Pécs. 5.  On 16 April 1986 the applicant filed for divorce. In the proceedings before the Nagyatád District Court he also claimed the division of the matrimonial property. 6.  The District Court held hearings on 6 January, 3 March and 19 June 1987. It appointed an expert architect to evaluate the investments which the parties’ had made in their house. 7.  On 22 September 1987 the District Court pronounced the parties’ divorce. 8.  On 21 October 1987 the expert submitted his opinion. 9.  On 23 June 1988 the District Court gave a decision on the division of the matrimonial property.
On appeal, on 1 December 1988 the Somogy County Regional Court held a hearing, quashed the first-instance decision and remitted the case to the first-instance court. 10.  In the resumed proceedings before the District Court, on 17 January 1989 the applicant extended his action to involve his son and the mother of his ex-wife. 11.  On 31 March, 17 April, 16 May, 26 July, 12 September 1989 and 29 August 1990 the District Court held hearings. 12.  On 11 February 1991 the District Court appointed an agricultural expert to make an evaluation of the parties’ orchard. The expert submitted his opinion on 16 April 1991. 13.  On 7 September 1992 the District Court heard the expert architect as well as four witnesses. A further hearing took place on 29 January 1993. 14.  On 2 November 1993 the District Court divided the matrimonial property. 15.  On 2 December 1993 the applicant requested the rectification of the judgment. On 16 December 1993 the District Court dismissed his request. The Regional Court confirmed this decision on 29 April 1994. 16.  On appeal, the Regional Court held hearings on 28 April and 2 June 1994. On 10 June 1994 it modified the first-instance judgment. 17.  On 17 October 1994 the applicant filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court. 18.  On 25 April 1995 the Supreme Court quashed the second-instance judgment and remitted the case to the Regional Court. 19.  In the resumed proceedings, a hearing took place on 16 November 1995. On 23 December 1995 the Regional Court appointed an agricultural expert who submitted his opinion on 28 May 1996. 20.  On 5 September and 14 November 1996 the Regional Court held further hearings. On the latter occasion the agricultural expert and a witness were heard. 21.  On 29 November 1996 the Regional Court appointed a forestry expert. The expert presented his opinion on 23 April 1997 and finalised it on 2 June 1997. 22.  On 5 June and 3 July 1997 the Regional Court heard a witness and the forestry expert. 23.  On 10 July 1997 the mother of the applicant’s ex-wife died. The Regional Court interrupted the proceedings on 18 July 1997. On 10 February 1998 the applicant requested the court to arrange for the deceased defendant’s successor to enter the proceedings. On 4 May 1998 the local public notary informed the court that the applicant’s son, being already a party to the case, was the successor. 24.  On 28 August 1998 the Regional Court put further questions to the forestry expert. The expert submitted his replies on 9 November 1998. 25.  On 4 February 1999 the parties requested that the proceedings be stayed. 26.  On 7 October 1999, at the applicant’s request, the Regional Court continued the proceedings and held a hearing. 27.  On 14 October 1999 the Regional Court delivered the final judgment in the case. It was served on the applicant on 4 November 1999.