4.  The applicant was born in 1938 and lives in Zagreb. 5.  On 30 May 1992 the applicant's house in Velika Črešnjevica, was blown up by unknown perpetrators. 6.  On 22 February 1995 the applicant brought a civil action against the State in the Zagreb Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Zagrebu) seeking damages. He relied on section 180 of the Civil Obligations Act. 7.  On 3 February 1996 the Amendment to the Civil Obligations Act (“the 1996 Amendment”) entered into force. It provided that all proceedings concerning actions for damages resulting from terrorist acts or acts of violence were to be stayed pending the enactment of new legislation on the subject. 8.  On 15 March 1996 the Zagreb Municipal Court stayed the proceedings pursuant to the 1996 Amendment. 9.  On 31 July 2003 the Act on Liability for Damage Resulting from Terrorist Acts and Public Demonstrations (“the 2003 Liability Act”) entered into force. 10.  Pursuant to the 2003 Liability Act, the Municipal Court resumed the proceedings. 11.  Meanwhile, on 17 April 2002 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint about the length of proceedings under section 63 of the Constitutional Court Act. On 24 March 2004 the Constitutional Court accepted the applicant's complaint. Relying on the Court's case law (Kutić v. Croatia, no. 48778/99, ECHR 2002‑II), it found violations of the applicant's constitutional rights to a hearing within a reasonable time and of access to a court. It ordered the Zagreb Municipal Court to give a decision in the applicant's case within a year and awarded him compensation in the amount of 4,400 Croatian kunas (HRK). 12.  On 12 May 2004 the Zagreb Municipal Court declared the applicant's action inadmissible finding that it no longer had jurisdiction in the matter. 13.  The applicant appealed against the judgment to the Zagreb County Court (Županijski sud u Zagrebu). It would appear that the proceedings are currently pending before that court.