4.  The applicants were born in 1942 and 1946 respectively and live in Rybnik, Poland. 5.  In 1992 and 1993 the prosecutor conducted an investigation in connection with the applicants’ allegedly illegal business activities. 6.  On 16 December 1993 they were charged with fraud. 7.  In July 1994 the applicants were indicted before the Katowice Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki). 8.  On 18 October 1994 the trial court held the first hearing. 9.  In 1995 the court held nine hearings. Some of them were adjourned or cancelled due to the absence of witnesses. In 1996, 1997 and 1998 the trial court scheduled numerous hearings. However, most of them were either adjourned due to the absence of witnesses or cancelled. 10.  On 10 December 1998 the Katowice Regional Court gave judgment. The court convicted the applicants and sentenced them to suspended prison terms of one year and six months and two years respectively. 11.  The applicants appealed against the judgment. 12.  The Katowice Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) held one hearing on 27 April 2000 and on the same date gave judgment. The court quashed the impugned judgment and remitted the case. 13.  On 6 September 2000 the Katowice Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) held the first hearing. 14.  In January 2001 the court decided that the Gliwice Regional Court was competent to examine the case. 15.  The trial court held hearings in May, July and November 2001. Subsequently, hearings were held at year-long intervals: in October 2002 and September 2003. The hearing in September 2003 was held before the Racibórz District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) to which, in the meantime, the case had been transferred. 16.  The Racibórz District Court held several hearings and on 28 September 2004 it gave judgment. The trial court convicted the applicants but reduced the suspended prison terms to which they had been sentenced. 17.  The applicants appealed. 18.  On 2 November 2004 the applicants lodged with the Katowice Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) a complaint about a breach of the right to have their case heard within a reasonable time. They relied on the 2004 Act on complaints about a breach of the right to a trial within a reasonable time. On 14 December 2004 the Katowice Court of Appeal dismissed the complaints. The court examined the course of the impugned proceedings only as regards the period between 2002 and 2004 when the case had been pending before the District Court and established that the proceedings had been conducted diligently. It further held that the trial courts could not be held responsible for delays caused by the absence of witnesses or illness of the parties. 19.  On 21 February 2005 the Gliwice Regional Court dismissed their appeal against the judgment of 28 September 2004. The judgment is final.