4.  In 2001 the applicant purchased a flat from a private company P. 5.  In September 2002 another company, N., lodged a civil action against the company P., the applicant and several other persons claiming title to the flat. 6.  On 25 July 2003 the Nizhegorodskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod rejected the claim. 7.  On 19 December 2003 the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal and it became final and binding. 8.  The courts found, inter alia, that when the company N. claimed title to the flat the latter had been already in the applicant’s possession, and therefore, under the relevant law, could not be given to the claimant. 9.  On unspecified date the company N. applied for supervisory review of the judgments of 25 July 2003 and 19 December 2003. 10.  On 9 March 2004 a judge of the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court refused to refer the case to the Presidium for consideration by way of supervisory review. 11.  On 28 April 2004 the acting President of the Regional Court disagreed and requested the case from the District Court. On 25 May 2004 he referred the case to the Presidium of the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court. 12.  On 17 June 2004 the Presidium of the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court quashed the judgment of 25 July 2003 and the appeal judgment of 19 December 2003 for incorrect interpretation of the domestic law, and remitted the case for a fresh examination. It found, inter alia, that the inferior courts did not take into account that the flat was given to the applicant under a void agreement, and therefore the applicant’s possession of the flat did not preclude the company N. from claiming a title to it. 13.  On 5 April 2005 the Nizhegorodskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod found against the applicant. On 6 September 2005 the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal. 14.  On 30 March 2006, under the applicant’s initiative, the Presidium of the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court quashed these judgments by way of supervisory review and remitted the case for fresh consideration. 15.  On 2 February 2007 the Nizhegorodskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod held against the applicant. It deprived the applicant of the title to the disputed flat on the grounds that the sales agreement had been null and void. The court also ordered that company P. pay the applicant compensation for the flat and that the applicant and her daughter be evicted from the flat. 16.  On 24 April 2007 the Nizhniy Novgorod Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal.