4.  The applicant is a joint stock company based in Braşov. 5.  On 25 August 1994 the applicant brought proceedings against the Transilvania University of Braşov seeking payment by the latter of an amount of money allegedly resulting from a contract they had entered into, which concerned repairs that had to be carried out by the applicant to one of the university’s halls of residence. 6.  On 27 October 1995 the Braşov Regional Court (“the Regional Court”) dismissed the action as premature, considering that the contract had not come to an end. 7.  On 8 February 1996 the Braşov Court of Appeal (“the Court of Appeal”) allowed an appeal by the applicant, quashed the previous judgment and sent the case back to the Regional Court for fresh examination. It considered that the first-instance court had come to a decision on the basis of an exception that was inapplicable. 8.  During the retrial, of the nine hearings held between 25 June 1996 and 4 February 1998, two were adjourned at the applicant’s request. This included the hearing of 25 June 1996 when it requested an adjournment to allow the Supreme Court of Justice to decide on its demand to transfer the case to another court, the hearing being fixed for 16 July 1996. The Regional Court adjourned the hearings until 29 October 1996.
According to the applicant, on 16 July 1996 the Supreme Court of Justice dismissed its request. 9.  On 11 February 1998 the Regional Court rejected the applicant’s action as being groundless. 10.  On 25 June 1998 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by the applicant. 11.  On 18 March 1999 the Supreme Court of Justice allowed by a final decision an appeal on points of law by the applicant, quashed the previous judgment and remitted the case to the court of appeal for fresh consideration. It found that one of the judges had also taken part in the proceedings when the first-instance court had given the judgment of 27 October 1995. 12.  During the retrial, on 15 November 1999 the applicant informed the Court of Appeal that it had made a request before the Supreme Court of Justice to have the case transferred to another court, the hearing being fixed for 17 February 2000. The Court of Appeal decided to stay the proceedings and sent the file to the archives. The hearings were resumed on 21 April 2000.
The Supreme Court of Justice dismissed the applicant’s request. 13.  On 3 May 2000 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by the applicant against the judgment of 11 February 1998, on the grounds that the applicant’s claims had not been proved. 14.  On 22 June 2001 the Supreme Court of Justice by a final decision rejected as groundless an appeal on points of law by the applicant.