6.  The applicants were born in 1953, 1975 and 1974 respectively and live in Sofia. The first applicant is the mother of the second and the third applicants. 7.  In 1984 the first applicant bought from the Sofia municipality a two‑room apartment of 61 square metres. 8.  The apartment had been confiscated by the State from Mr S.M. who in 1983 had been convicted of espionage and treason and sentenced to imprisonment and confiscation of his property. In a judgment of 20 April 1990 the Supreme Court quashed Mr S.M.’s conviction finding that the courts had breached the relevant procedural rules. 9.  In 1997 Mr S.M. brought rei vindicatio proceedings against the first applicant. 10.  In a final judgment of 16 April 2004 the Supreme Court of Cassation allowed the claim. It found that the contract by virtue of which the first applicant had acquired the flat at issue in 1984 had not been signed by the mayor, as required by law, but by another official in the municipality. This rendered the first applicant’s title null and void ab initio. She could not have acquired the apartment through adverse possession either as prior to 1996 State property could not be acquired in this way. The apartment had therefore remained State-owned and the judgment of 20 April 1990 had had the effect of restoring Mr S.M.’s title over it. 11.  In August 2004 the applicants, who all lived in the apartment, vacated it. The first and second applicants rented another apartment and moved in there. 12.  In April 2004 they applied for the tenancy of a municipal apartment and in June 2007 were offered a two-room flat in the outskirts of the city. They refused the offer. 13.  In May 2004 the first applicant applied to receive compensation bonds under the 1997 Law on Compensation for Owners of Nationalised Real Property. According to the latest information available to the Court, as of October 2008, the regional governor had not yet decided on the request.